-
Recently Browsing 0 members
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
Topics
-
-
Popular Contributors
-
1
-
2
.thumb.jpeg.d2d19a66404642fd9ff62d6262fd153e.jpeg)
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
-
Latest posts...
-
70
Border Shut Tight: Migrants Turn Back as Trump’s Immigration Crackdown Takes Hold
You clearly havent been paying attention to what Musk has been exposing withbthe social security, not surprising you don't know due to the media you see. -
57
Are you actually using AI yet?
Around the same time, I was at the university. On tests in stat class, most of us had to do the math longhand. But one or two that were rich enough to afford calculators were allowed to use them. I thought that was very unfair. -
5
Accident Trailer Truck Following GPS Topples Power Pole, Flattens Car in Khon Kaen
An excavator on the back of a semi is normal....that's how they're moved! The cabling in Thailand is abysmal...always opting for the cheapest way to do things....and the stupid concrete poles so often, just break! -
0
Trump Blames Zelensky’s Stance for Stalling Ukraine Peace Talks
Trump Blames Zelensky’s Stance for Stalling Ukraine Peace Talks Former U.S. President Donald Trump has sharply criticized Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, claiming that Zelensky’s recent remarks about Crimea are damaging the prospects for peace in Ukraine. Trump’s comments came after Zelensky made it clear that Kyiv would never recognize Russia’s control over Crimea, the territory illegally annexed by Moscow in 2014. During a press conference on Tuesday, Zelensky reaffirmed his government's uncompromising position, saying, “There’s nothing to talk about here. This is against our constitution,” in reference to any potential recognition of Russian sovereignty over Crimea. The firm stance was quickly met with disapproval from Trump, who took to his social media platform Truth Social to voice his concerns. “This statement is very harmful to the peace negotiations with Russia,” Trump said, warning that such language would only prolong the ongoing bloodshed. He added, “It’s inflammatory statements like Zelensky’s that makes it so difficult to settle this war.” JD Vance: “The Ukrainians and the Russians are both gonna have to give up some of the territories they currently own…the only way for the killing to stop is that both armies put down their weapons.” -
0
Laser-Equipped US Spy Drone Unveiled as Game-Changer in Modern Warfare
Laser-Equipped US Spy Drone Unveiled as Game-Changer in Modern Warfare In a bold technological leap amid rising fears of a potential global conflict, a U.S. defense company has unveiled a revolutionary weapon: a drone-mounted laser capable of melting missiles mid-air. General Atomics introduced this first-of-its-kind defense system at the Sea Air Space 2025 event in National Harbor, Maryland, revealing its integration with the MQ-9B SkyGuardian — an advanced autonomous intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) drone. The laser currently operates at an output of 25 kilowatts, enough to neutralize or destroy small airborne threats, particularly swarms of low-cost, disposable drones. But General Atomics claims the system’s capabilities are far from capped. The technology could be scaled up to 300 kilowatts, allowing it to take down much larger and more dangerous targets such as cruise missiles and enemy aircraft by melting through critical structural components. This new laser system is designed for both pulsed and continuous operation, and is capable of functioning in all kinds of environmental conditions, making it versatile for modern battlefield demands. During the event, General Atomics showcased video footage of the MQ-9B laser targeting and neutralizing drones modeled after Iran’s Shahed 'kamikaze' drones — the same type of weapon used in recent global conflicts — as they approached a navy vessel. Beyond its futuristic appeal, the laser represents a significant cost-saving measure for the military. Traditionally, incoming drones or missiles are intercepted with expensive and non-reusable missiles. In contrast, laser beams are immune to direct destruction and can continue delivering damage as long as the drone’s power supply holds. “A laser beam can't be directly destroyed, and it will keep inflicting damage as long as it has power,” a company representative explained. However, the primary limitation remains the power supply. While the MQ-9B SkyGuardian can stay airborne for over 40 hours, the addition of a high-energy laser could reduce its operational endurance. General Atomics has not yet disclosed the extent of this reduction, leaving questions about sustained deployment in high-intensity combat zones. Nevertheless, this development is a milestone in the U.S. military’s pursuit of airborne high-energy laser (HEL) systems. The journey has not been smooth — the U.S. Air Force’s SHiELD program, once intended to shield aircraft from missile threats, was terminated in 2024 without producing a functional prototype or conducting any test flights. Despite this, the Air Force Research Lab maintained that the initiative had achieved “significant advances in the readiness of airborne HEL technology.” It's possible these advances contributed indirectly to General Atomics’ breakthrough, though the company emphasizes its system was developed independently. The timing of this innovation couldn't be more critical. Swarming drone attacks and kamikaze-style aerial strikes, like those witnessed in Ukraine and across the Middle East, have become increasingly frequent and affordable. Between August 1, 2024, and March 1, 2025, Ukraine recorded 15,011 Shahed-type drones launched by Russia, many aimed at civilian targets, according to the Institute for Science and International Security. Traditional missile-based defense mechanisms are proving too costly and sluggish to address the growing tide of small, fast-moving aerial threats. A laser-equipped drone like the MQ-9B could offer a much-needed solution — rapid, accurate, and economically sustainable. As the global security landscape grows ever more volatile, innovations like this may very well redefine how nations defend themselves in the skies. Adpated by ASEAN Now from Daily Mail 2025-04-24 -
0
Behind the Curtain: Harvard’s Quiet Courtship with Trump Before Its Bold Rejection
Before Harvard University emerged as a vocal opponent of the Trump administration’s demands, the prestigious institution had been quietly trying to broker a deal behind closed doors. While the university is now celebrated by some for standing firm against federal pressure, internal efforts to engage the administration were extensive—and not without controversy. Harvard’s transformation into a perceived bulwark against President Trump’s agenda began with an April 11 letter from the White House outlining demands that included reducing faculty influence and allowing government audits of university data. The Harvard Corporation, the school’s powerful and secretive governing board, declared those conditions untenable and broke off discussions. Days later, Harvard filed a lawsuit against the administration, challenging threats to cut billions in federal funding. div class="post-ads"> But that public defiance followed weeks of backchannel negotiations. Motivated in part by mounting pressure from major donors and the growing political influence of the Trump administration, Harvard had been scrambling to avoid a confrontation. The university even retained the same lawyer used by the firm Paul Weiss in its own dealings with Trump, signaling serious intent to reach a compromise. Dr. Alan Garber, Harvard’s president, sought multiple paths to the White House. According to people familiar with the matter, he contacted Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law and a Harvard alumnus, to request help facilitating a meeting with the president. Kushner declined. Garber also turned to billionaire donor John Paulson, once considered for Treasury Secretary under Trump, asking for his assistance in arranging a meeting. That, too, never came to fruition. Despite Harvard’s eventual hardline stance, the internal debate was far from settled. Many prominent donors urged the university to resume talks with the White House. During a call last Thursday with Dr. Garber and Harvard Corporation’s senior fellow Penny Pritzker, several donors—including Paulson and hedge fund CEO William A. Ackman—encouraged negotiation over litigation. “Productive discussions” were needed, Paulson reportedly said. In a statement, Pritzker attempted to balance Harvard’s opposition to federal overreach with a nod to needed reform. “Harvard’s opposition to government overreach should not be seen as a lack of commitment to making the changes Harvard needs to make,” she said. “We remain firmly committed to our efforts to combat antisemitism and create a community that is strengthened by viewpoint diversity.” Some donors remained skeptical, especially in the wake of the 2023 crisis that led to the resignation of former president Claudine Gay. Wealthy contributors like Len Blavatnik, a Trump supporter, paused their giving and voiced their displeasure with the school’s response to antisemitism. While Blavatnik has since resumed some donations, his frustration reflects wider unease among Harvard’s elite backers. Former Harvard president and Treasury Secretary Larry Summers also expressed concern about the administration’s handling of campus antisemitism and the shifting national climate. Amid growing conservative criticism, Harvard made some concessions. The university announced the departure of the director of its Center for Middle Eastern Studies—a move long demanded by conservative voices who accused the center of fostering antisemitic rhetoric. Dr. Garber later acknowledged that the White House had raised valid concerns. “We agree with a lot of what is in the government’s letter,” he said during a recent donor call. Despite the university’s lawsuit and assertive public posture, his comments suggested an openness to recalibration. Harvard’s future approach remains uncertain, caught between preserving academic independence and maintaining critical federal funding. What’s clear is that before the university became a symbol of defiance, it first sought reconciliation—only to discover that the political and donor landscape left little room for quiet compromise. Adpated by ASEAN Now from New York Times 2025-04-24
-
-
Popular in The Pub
-
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now