kwilco
-
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by kwilco
-
-
- Popular Post
10 minutes ago, johng said: His Handler is not in Moscow is it ? think why did he betray his MAGA base and
start yet another war in the middle east at the behest of Israel ???
...and eased sanctions on Russian oil!
-
3
-
-
1
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
3 hours ago, Roadsternut said: The Avenger Minesweepers were pulled out lat September, and have been scrapped. The Independance class LCSs are supposed to carry out minesweeping, using a mine hunting module. Unlike the Avengers and Hunt class ships, the LCSs are at best stand off minesweepers, because they have hulls that can become magnetized. Their autonomous capability depends on line of sight, so doesn't work when there are waves (a Starlink mod apparently gives a shonky capability). And their sensors can't work in turbid water, which is most of the time in the Straits).
Their Navy does know how to clear the Straits, but their leadership has deprived them of the tools because of basically the corruption involved in the procurement of the LCSs.
https://www.navylookout.com/royal-navys-last-gulf-minehunter-hms-middleton-has-returned-to-uk/
Trump thought (or thinks) that warships can protect the oil tankers by escorting them through the Strait – he's totally deluded. He's sacked all the people who could advise him and now his "short" operation has turned into a lingering, festering wound.
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
15 minutes ago, rattlesnake said: Understand what? Please explain it to me as if I were five years old – as you know, I am not the sharpest tool in the box.
Exactly. QED – I've already explained Brandolini's law, or the Bull<deleted> Asymmetry Principle, and you giving it are a perfect example.
"You have just produced 100 words; those could have been put to better use. As a superior mind, do you not have a moral duty to work for the greater good and parse what is right from wrong? If not, then why are you a regular contributor to the Off the Beaten Track subforum?" – and there you go!
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
34 minutes ago, rattlesnake said: Incorrect. Disproving an invalid point is very easy.
No,, it isn't. Take your comments in point – I really can't be arsed to rebut your wild shortcomings in understanding even basic language – it seriously is not worth the effort. For instance, if I say you are wrong and the colour is red, not green, all you have to do is say, "No, it isn't," and I have to go into colour/light frequencies – it simply isn't worth it, and you really don't understand seeing stars from the moon – it is really not worth arguing with someone too simple to understand even the "quotes" he is trying to use.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
26 minutes ago, rattlesnake said: Are you trying to disprove Rogan's point that Michael Collins wrote that he saw stars in his 1974 book Carrying the Fire: An Astronaut's Journeys?
Excerpts:
"To add to the dramatic effect, we find we can see the stars again. We are in the shadow of the moon now, in darkness for the first time in three days, and the elusive stars have reappeared."
"My God, the stars are everywhere: above me on all sides, even below me somewhat, down there next to that obscure horizon. The stars are bright and they are steady."
do you genuinely not understand that??
-
1
-
1
-
-
The British Navy will clear the Hormuz Strait.
The Americans can't. They don't know how to... He's asking for warships – they are totally ineffective protecting oil tankers against mines.
THere has to be effective mine clearance – only the British navy can do that.
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
-
-
1 minute ago, rattlesnake said: Interesting points raised by Rogan.
It is important to understand the problems of arguing with an idiot.
-
1
-
-
he Apollo moon landings (1969–1972) are supported by a vast, independent, and scientifically verified body of evidence that makes faking them technologically and practically impossible. The proof ranges from physical lunar samples to independent observations by rival nations.
Here are the main points that prove the moon landings were not a hoax:
1. Physical Evidence: Lunar Samples (Moon Rocks)
382kg of Moon Rocks: Apollo astronauts brought back 382 kilograms (842 pounds) of moon rocks, core samples, and dust.
Unique Characteristics: These rocks are distinct from Earth rocks—they are entirely devoid of water, have tiny "glass spherules" (formed by meteorite impacts, not volcanic activity), and show evidence of high-speed micrometeorite bombardment.
International Verification: These samples have been shared with scientists in dozens of countries for decades and have all been verified as having a lunar origin.
BBC +4
2. Physical Evidence: Third-Party & Independent Imagery
Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO): NASA’s LRO, in orbit since 2009, has captured high-resolution images of all Apollo landing sites, clearly showing the lunar modules, equipment, and even astronaut footprints.
Independent International Imaging: Other nations' probes—Japan’s SELENE (2008), India’s Chandrayaan-1 and 2, and China’s Chang’e 2—have photographed or identified Apollo hardware and lander exhaust dust marks, providing independent verification.
Wikipedia +1
3. Scientific Evidence: Laser Retroreflectors
Mirrors on the Moon: Apollo 11, 14, and 15 missions left behind "lunar laser ranging retroreflectors" (mirrors).
Operational Today: Scientists from the U.S., France, Germany, and Australia have fired lasers at these reflectors for over 50 years to measure the Earth-Moon distance to the centimeter, confirming they are still in place.
Wikipedia +4
4. Third-Party Tracking and Monitoring
Soviet Tracking: The United States' biggest rival during the Space Race, the Soviet Union, monitored the missions through its own intelligence and surveillance network. They knew the spacecraft was traveling to the Moon and would have exposed a hoax instantly.
Independent Observers: Radio operators and observatories in several countries, including Britain's Jodrell Bank Observatory, tracked the flights to the Moon and back.
Wikipedia +1
5. Debunking Common "Hoax" Claims
The "Waving" Flag: The flag used a horizontal rod to keep it unfurled in a vacuum. It only rippled while the astronauts were actively planting it; it remained perfectly still afterwards.
No Stars in Photos: Apollo missions landed during the lunar day. The sunlit surface was extremely bright, requiring short camera exposures that did not capture the faint stars in the black sky.
Van Allen Radiation Belts: NASA knew of the radiation risk and designed the spacecraft with shielding, choosing a high-speed trajectory that minimized time spent in the most dangerous parts of the belts.
BBC +4
6. The "Impossible to Fake" Argument
Technology Limitations: In 1969, the technology required to fake the photographic lighting (recreating parallel sunlight) and the lunar surface shadows did not exist, especially not on the massive scale required to create hours of video.
Massive Participation: Over 400,000 scientists, engineers, and workers were involved in the Apollo project. Keeping such a secret for over 50 years would be impossible.
Multiple Missions: Conspiracy theorists often focus on Apollo 11, but there were six successful crewed landings.
EBSCO +4
In summary, the physical, photographic, and scientific evidence—verified by the global scientific community and independent foreign powers—confirms that humans did indeed land on the Moon.
-
1
-
- Popular Post
2 hours ago, simon43 said: By refusing to support Trump, these EU countries have clearly demonstrated that they have capitulated to Islamic terrorists...
What a brilliant comment!! – it clearly shows how stupid MAGA can be.
-
3
-
13
-
1
-
2
-
2
-
3
-
- Popular Post
15 minutes ago, Jim Waldron said: What we’re seeing here is not “allied cooperation” — it’s pressure politics dressed up as diplomacy.
The Strait of Hormuz didn’t suddenly become unstable on its own. It became unstable because of a chain of decisions made in Washington that escalated tensions, disrupted existing agreements, and created the very crisis the U.S. is now demanding everyone else help clean up.
And now, after lighting the fuse, Washington turns around and tells its allies: “Well, get in there and fix it.”
Sorry, but that’s not how responsible global leadership works.
No NATO country was under threat until U.S. policy choices manufactured the threat.
Europe wasn’t facing tanker seizures before the U.S. tore up diplomatic frameworks that were actually working.
Asian economies weren’t staring down oil‑route instability until the U.S. unilaterally escalated confrontation.
The UK wouldn’t be scrambling to reopen shipping lanes if the situation hadn’t been pushed to the brink in the first place.
This is the geopolitical equivalent of smashing a neighbour’s window and then demanding they pay for the replacement because “it’s in everyone’s interest.”
It’s coercion, plain and simple!
If Washington’s actions created the instability, then Washington should be the one to stabilise it.
Allies shouldn’t be strong‑armed into underwriting the consequences of decisions they didn’t make and didn’t support.
The message back should be simple:
“You broke it. You fix it! ”
Because until that principle is respected, “alliance” becomes a one‑way street where others pay the bill for choices made by Trump, and that’s not a sustainable model for global security, trade, or diplomacy.
He's seriously miscalculated. In the last war, the British had a fleet of minesweepers in the region – that doesn't exist. I guess he doesn't know that.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
- Popular Post
So, Trump unilaterally starts a war that inevitably leads to the closing of the Strait of Hormuz.
and AFTER they close, tells other countries to send ships – was he wrong-footed? Did he seriously not anticipate this? Surely if he had, he would have told his "allies" what he intended and asked for their support before he started the war?
-
5
-
5
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, Hawaiian said: The brass in the Pentagon must be fuming, having to take orders from an idiot who actually knows nothing about military strategy and planning. It just a matter of time before most of them quit and move on.
He sacked most of his advisors and experts as soon as he'd got into office. And replaced all the experts with sychophants
-
Trump is showing how little he understands about the Straights of Hormuz.
He is asking other countries, after initially saying they were "too late" to escort tankers through the Straights.
WHAT??? How does he think that will work....all Iran has to do is mine the Straights....no amount of warships can prevent that.
The Britsh navy used to have a fleet of minesweepers nearby, but they have been depleted to nothing.
Trump simply has no idea of what is happening and his short sharp shock is no longer "short" or "fun"
-
-
This video from 2011 shows how utterly unreliable and inconsistantTrump is...
-
-
On 3/14/2026 at 8:47 AM, BritManToo said: How was he a scammer?
It was a Thai that stopped the boat from fulfilling the tours.
Explain the logic of that comment,!
-
1
-
-
One seriously has to question Trumps mental wellbeing, but what is even more difficult to understand is all those around d him doing his will.... what is going through their heads??
This is an i teredting comment by Trump...
-
-
-
8 hours ago, khaosokman said: CNN are proven liars like you and many others on here.
So what do you make of this??? As a Trump quote?
"It is the press, above all, which wages a positively fanatical and slanderous struggle, tearing down everything which can be regarded as a support of national independence, cultural elevation, and the economic independence of the nation."
Trump Criticises UK’s Cautious Approach to Iran Conflict
in World News - Discussion
Basically Trump started ` war; it's not getting out of control, and he's asking people to bail him out AFTER the fact.