I'm certainly not complaining, but I find it hard to believe that shooting a handful of missiles at some storage buildings with zero casualties was a satisfying resolution for Iran.

Iraq is trying to kick out the U.S. That's a big win for Iran. What more could they get with more attacks?

Yes, the military is good at blowing up buildings and weddings or whatever. I'm not denying they have incredible equipment and training. War goes far beyond blowing up whatever you want. Results matter and those results have sucked.

I also don't know how you can say the COMMANDER IN CHIEF and SECRETARY OF DEFENSE shouldn't count as part of the military. They are literally the people who make the decisions for the military. They are the leaders.

Probably wasn't but I'm sure they don't want a direct escalation either.

Still kind of surprised how weak their response was. Figured they'd do something bigger with a proxy for plausible deniability.

If we managed to avoid this escalating (which it looks like so far), then I'm happy.

Internal fervor, I guess? I won't claim to know the slightest intricacies of what goes on in Iran but I read several articles suggesting that a nice big foreign Boogeyman would serve to distract their own populace from recent grumblings.

Such a tepid response and immediate capitulation doesn't seem like it would be very effective in that regard.

So I'm lost with this plane crash. Are we to believe that a plane crash in Tehran just randomly happens within hours of this military escalation? Very odd story...

They are politicians. They make.grand sweeping general decisions, which the military must break down into a systematic string of decisions and actions to then execute, as is their duty. That doesn't mean the military is a mess.

And as decision makers, those non-military politicians have been inarguably terrible.

They are not part of the military, any more than you are part of the hammer just because you're swinging it.

Pilotman, you do understand that most Americans paint in crayon, especially when it comes to anything outside of the US, right? The simplest story here is that Iran killed a contractor, and we killed the number 2 man in their government. That will be defined as a win. To try to explain it further takes more words than people will listen to. This is why they win.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

I am surprised this has turned out the way it has.

I am surprised shot missiles with the intent to not hurt anyone.

I am surprised Trump is using some sense here.

This is the last thing I expected when the news started coming in last night that they were launching missiles at US assets.

+1

Agree with Pilotman on the big picture, absolutely, but in the immediate term, this is absolutely the best we can hope for.

Jim Bakker is a thing again?

I never believed this would ever amount to anything of any significance. After Iraq, it always seemed like the next big battle would be a proxy war between the Saudis and Iran in the region. Perhaps we're still doing their dirty work, which after 9/11 still strikes me as incredible or they aren't as big a player in the ME as they want you to believe.

smoke, fire, sounding like you were right...

Also, this:

BREAKING: @thejointstaff Chairman Milley and Defense Secretary @EsperDoD just briefed us again - new: They believe #Iran was targeting US lives at the #alasad base, not intending to miss . Early warning saved those lives, they said (more)

— Tara Copp (@TaraCopp) January 8, 2020

Remember what we said about the AA crash in JFK after 9/11?

That ended up being totally unrelated.

Plus, those things are reported with every crash, whether or not they are accurate.

That means there is hope for the domestic terrorist that executed those people during the Hanukkah celebrations?

Agree and disagree, no doubt it could be complete coincidence. However your AA example was like months later right? This happened the same night in the same area. Had a third plane crashed into a building on 9-11 accidentally I would more agree with your point.

Isn't the plane that crashed incredibly safe? Was interested to hear your thoughts. There were a lot of commercial planes flying in the area at the time so I don't know what would have singled that one out.

Tehran is also far from the action and I would have to imagine they would have picked it up on the radar entering the country far earlier. Just seems like a weird mistake.

Here's the thing. In a combat area passenger planes getting shot down isn't a new thing either. The US, Russians, and now it looks like the Iranians might have. Yes, the plane is very safe, but accidents happen. A crash on takeoff is one thing, the Malaysian plane that the Russians shot down was at cruise. That's way more suspect. Al Queda in Iraq tried to shoot down a DHL 767 and the engine contained the entire blast. These engines are smaller than those, and may not have been able to handle the blast as well either.



The whole thing seems rare to me. A commercial airport, with lots of planes taking off regularly, and someone decides to turn on radar and fire a couple SAM's at it? There's a number of very deliberate steps there. That's not just a oops we thought we were doing this one thing, and then we did this other, kind of mistake. We do know that planes crash. We know they have major issues, and takeoff and landing are the most critical phases of flight where bad things happen. So an accident at takeoff wouldn't be unheard of.



Of course, now we have multiple reports, from multiple agencies, and countries agreeing that this was a shoot down, so that looks more likely. But even then, the knee jerk jump to it, seemed quick at the time, without further corroboration.

NY Times has a video supposedly.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/09/v...e-missile.html

First part: I don't agree, I'd say the opposite from listening to him and more importantly so do a lot of people who are lot smarter than me and more knowledgeable in the related scientific fields. The whole 'Daddy's money' thing implies he inherited a stack of money. It was $28,000. He was able to raise investment capital for the rest and four years later his share of Zip2 being sold was 22 million. He then multiplied his money again with X.com.

Elon does make broad irresponsible pronouncements and I certainly don't defend those, but on the other hand nobody called him a 'savior' here, least of all me so that's some ridiculous goalpost-shifting. SpaceX actually relies almost mostly on private funding not government subsidies from everything I can find so I'd be interested in your source on that, but he's done also some demonstrably working things. StarLink is underway and is proven technology. The Tesla 3 is by far the biggest-selling EV, playing a major role is getting us less dependent on oil and also appears to be on track to make Tesla profitable. SpaceX has done a number of needed things faster than any other company, etc. These are not hypotheticals or falsehoods, they are real-world results.

He's the next Bezos/Gates/Branson imo. Tesla might not be making money, but the car and the company are next level future of auto's type stuff. Amazon was skewered for years, until it wasn't. I continue to invest in the company.

NASA gave SpaceX half a billion to launch their business. They have received billions in government contracts. It's so important that they are actually suing the US government for not choosing them for a contract. They would not be a business if it wasn't for the government.

As for Tesla, let's take a look at their profitable quarter back in 2018. They made $312 million. That was made possible by $52 million in ZEV credits, $137 million in non-ZEV credits, and $512 million in FIT subsidies. That's just the US. THey also get them overseas (some countries provide even more than the US).

I'm not even touching on the $1.3 billion they are getting from the state of Nevada for their battery plant.

Anyway, a few clips of this really smart guy who is not just a rich guy pretending to be Iron Man for a bunch of sycophants.

I've been impressed by Musk as well. Sure Tesla and SpaceX aren't profitable yet, but he's pushing technology in ways that it simply hasn't been. Tesla shoved the electric car market forward in real ways. And SpaceX is doing things that NASA simply isn't that interested in anymore.

Tesla pushed electric cars to the forefront. But they aren't doing anything that special anymore. More and more competition popping up each year that have the same features.

If they couldn't be profitable when they owned the EV market, why do people think they will be with a bunch of other companies in the fray?

Why do you think it's all about profitability here? Pushing (shoving really) a technology out in front is a great legacy. Besides, if the ball rolling gets electric cars as the standard (as opposed to internal combustion), then maybe Tesla becomes profitable at that point. As Pilotman pointed out, how long did it take for Amazon to make a profit?

Not to mention SpaceX's Starlink. These are big ideas that are being pushed forward. Sure, things like Hyperloop didn't get built, but we need CEOs willing to push things forward.

He didn't create the electric car. And if it wasn't for the massive subsidies involved in it, they would continue to be an afterthought in the market.

Satellite internet constellations are nothing new either. And there is going to be a ton of competition in the coming years. Believe Amazon is investing heavily.

And Steve Jobs didn't create the smartphone either...

Evangelical leaders who lay their loyalty and faith on the altar of @realDonaldTrump are betraying their congregants and their country. https://t.co/2n34Y2ftxH

— The Lincoln Project (@ProjectLincoln) January 9, 2020

Rick Wilson can surely make good TV

He also believed fruit would cure his cancer.

My initial comment was in regards to someone saying that we just needed to wait on Elon to solve the energy crisis. Being a good marketer or investor doesn't mean you're the guy we should be banking on to save our terrible foreign policy.

I was that guy and let's not exaggerate. You'll see when I mentioned "go Elon" its was "go Elon and like".

I'm glad that majority of folks so far agree with my sentiment that Elon (jerk as he is) is making a real difference here.

Let's hope he is making a difference. Our taxes are paying for it.

I work in implementing software and systems. One of the software I work with was first in the cloud arena back in late 00's, went public in 2012'ish and is still not profitable. The industry is maturing but many smart money is still on this company.

Why? They were effectively first in, they have the creds, clients know them and know the other companies are playing catchup (e.g. the others may have a product but not the full functionality, quality etc.), and they have faith this company will innovate and do greater things.

Yes, this company can still fail, get gobbled up etc. and judging a CEO by the company's profitability is valid, but you have to give some leeway when its still effectively in a maturing industry.

Tesla's market success is clearly built on the real perception of (valid or not) Elon's vision, marketing ability, business acumen etc. Call him many things, even call him a moron in his personal life, but a moron in business he is not.

All be worth it when you think long-term and Elon-and-like greatly reduces our dependency on ME oil.

I googled on this and after 3 pages, didn't see anything. Do you have a link, would like to read more and context.

When he was initially diagnosed, he delayed surgery for 9 months so he could do acupuncture and juicing to cure it. It's in his biography.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alicegw.../#5a8093417d2e

Okay, I thought you were referring to Elon and was googling on "elon cancer"

So if the Iranians did indeed shoot down that aircraft, does Trump have to respond? If so then how?

Seems like Canada would be the one to respond more than us?

Let's not forget the Ukrainians also.

Hmmm ... but it was Ukraine that shot down the Malaysian airliner? (Or was it Russians in Ukraine?)

It was absolutely the Russians.

Trump's rally tonight caused me to spend an extra 30 minutes in traffic. Thanks a lot jack-ass

It was "Russian partisans who were totally working on their own and not at all affiliated with or taking marching orders from the Kremlin nope nope just overzealous Russian patriots."

(It had the backing of the Kremlin.)

If people are only looking at what Tesla is doing in the US, they are completely missing out on what's going on with the company in China. China may steal the company, the tech, whatever, but if he's successful in building an empire there, the company is likely undervalued.

I represent more troops than any other member of this body. I buried one of them earlier today at Arlington.

If our servicemembers have the courage to fight and die in these wars, Congress ought to have the courage to vote for or against them.

I’m voting for this resolution. pic.twitter.com/cSCBG7CmIm

— Rep. Matt Gaetz (@RepMattGaetz) January 9, 2020

There's probably going to be no other time when I say Matt Gaetz is right.

I can’t remember where I read this, but I saw one article that said his strategy was to create and develop the electric car market to a point where it is attractive encourage for more to enter it

The more players that come in the better for him, as he has cornered the battery production that everybody will need

If that is the case it is a mark in the credit column for his intelligence

Confirmed: American businesses and consumers are paying 'approximately 100%' of Trump tariff costs

I am wondering if those in favor of this trade war are now fine with us tax payers meaning not the top 1% paying for it?

Do you honestly think anyones mind will be changed? Trumpers will scream it is fake news and their orange god will tell them we are getting rich off them. The rest of us already know the American consumer eats the cost.

Is this a shock? That's how tariffs generally work. The premise behind them is that there is a local manufacturer that can compete more effectively behind the tariff. With as much manufacturing as we off shored, in many industries there was no one to fill the void.

Yes. I think one has to weigh the pros and cons. Obviously there are a lot of cons but it's worth it if we are able to stop/reduce/delay/mitigate China overtaking the US in technology and ultimately superceding the US as the dominant economic and technological power.

I'm not convinced that Trump really has this in mind as his long-term goal nor this "war" alone will achieve that goal (e.g. it needs to be a concerted long term play with other administrations). But doing something about IPs and encouraging manufacturing away from China into other low cost countries is a good start.