Me #ahainastjeulietouaboutme #250epleasantballey #120 as they try to kick me out Hortencia Sepulveda As they didn't learn then Military Camp Area again they keep fucken trying at me LAX, Los Angeles again they keep going and going Sepulveda Dam Recreation Area remember the past SSG Sepulveda ARMY again we made ALOT as they sat on there asses Japan same idoit on RU-vid seijurie family Tired of them then they claim hanzu China like they have no honor
The sudden crackdown on free speech and protest, coupled with the defense of genocide by universities, underscores the insidious influence of arms manufacturers, donors, and lobbyists. When students dare to question the ethics of accepting funds from entities complicit in the perpetuation of violence and conflict, they are met with draconian measures aimed at stifling dissent and preserving the status quo. The construction of literal and metaphorical walls to exclude dissenting voices represents a blatant infringement upon the principles of academic freedom and democratic governance. By erecting barriers to protest and debate, universities betray their commitment to fostering intellectual inquiry and critical thinking, instead prioritizing the protection of financial interests over the rights and freedoms of their students and faculty. Moreover, the defense of genocide, whether explicit or implicit, serves as a chilling reminder of the moral bankruptcy that ensues when institutions prioritize profit over principles. By aligning themselves with perpetrators of mass violence and human rights abuses, universities not only betray their ethical obligations but also perpetuate a culture of impunity that emboldens future atrocities. This state of affairs is wholly unacceptable and demands a robust response from all who value justice, freedom, and human dignity. It is incumbent upon students, faculty, alumni, and concerned citizens to vocally and resolutely challenge the corrosive influence of arms manufacturers, donors, and lobbyists within academia and beyond. By refusing to be complicit in the perpetuation of violence and injustice, we can reclaim the moral and intellectual integrity of our educational institutions and strive towards a world founded upon the principles of peace, justice, and respect for human rights. The entrenched influence wielded by arms manufacturing donors and lobbyists over universities, dictating narratives and shaping public discourse, represents a pernicious encroachment upon academic freedom and the integrity of intellectual inquiry. To effectively dismantle this insidious apparatus, it is imperative to unveil its machinations and advocate for principled resistance grounded in ethical imperatives and a steadfast commitment to truth and justice. Foremost, the nexus between arms manufacturing donors and universities engenders a deleterious symbiosis wherein financial incentives eclipse academic autonomy and ethical considerations. The insidious infiltration of vested interests into the hallowed halls of academia distorts scholarly pursuits and compromises the integrity of research and pedagogy. By exposing the deleterious impact of such entanglements on the pursuit of knowledge and the advancement of societal welfare, one can galvanize collective opposition to their pernicious influence. Moreover, the manipulation of narratives and suppression of dissent orchestrated by these entrenched interests serves to perpetuate a culture of silence and conformity, stifling critical inquiry and dissenting voices. By shining a light on these coercive tactics and amplifying marginalized perspectives, one can disrupt the hegemony of dominant narratives and foster a more inclusive and pluralistic discourse reflective of diverse viewpoints and experiences. Furthermore, the corrosive effects of arms industry influence extend beyond the confines of academia, permeating public discourse and shaping popular perceptions of geopolitical realities. By exposing the vested interests behind sanitized narratives and challenging the normalization of militarism and violence, one can cultivate a more informed and conscientious citizenry capable of resisting manipulation and advocating for alternative visions of peace and security. In this endeavor, collaboration between scholars, activists, and civil society actors is paramount, marshaling collective resources and expertise to counteract the undue influence of arms manufacturing donors and lobbyists. Through strategic advocacy, coalition-building, and public education campaigns, it is possible to erode the stranglehold of vested interests and reclaim the intellectual and moral integrity of academic institutions and public discourse. Ultimately, the struggle to dismantle the influence of arms manufacturing donors and lobbyists represents a pivotal front in the broader battle for social justice, human rights, and global peace. By marshaling the collective will and moral fortitude of concerned individuals and communities, it is possible to challenge entrenched power structures and cultivate a more just and equitable world founded upon the principles of intellectual freedom, ethical integrity, and solidarity. The distortion perpetuated by arms manufacturing donors and lobbyists extends beyond mere financial influence, seeping insidiously into the fabric of academic discourse and public perception. Through a myriad of manipulative tactics, they craft narratives that sanitize the realities of militarism and war, obfuscate the human costs of armed conflict, and suppress dissenting voices challenging their hegemony. One insidious tactic employed is the framing of militarism as a necessary and inevitable component of national security and economic prosperity. By conflating military spending with job creation and national defense, they obscure the moral and ethical dimensions of the arms trade, portraying it as a benign and even beneficial enterprise. This distortion not only perpetuates a culture of militarization but also legitimizes the profiteering of arms manufacturers at the expense of human lives and global stability. Furthermore, arms manufacturing donors and lobbyists often engage in strategic philanthropy and public relations campaigns aimed at whitewashing their tarnished image and garnering legitimacy for their activities. By endowing academic institutions with generous grants and funding research projects, they seek to co-opt scholars and intellectuals into advancing their interests while simultaneously stifling critical inquiry into the ethics and implications of the arms trade. Additionally, through strategic lobbying and influence peddling, they exert pressure on policymakers and elected officials to shape legislation and foreign policy decisions in their favor. This manipulation of the political process not only undermines democratic governance but also perpetuates a cycle of militarism and conflict by prioritizing arms sales and geopolitical interests over diplomacy and peaceful resolution of disputes. Moreover, they leverage their financial clout to control media narratives and public discourse, shaping the parameters of acceptable debate and marginalizing dissenting voices. By funding think tanks, sponsoring conferences, and cultivating relationships with journalists and opinion makers, they propagate a distorted worldview that valorizes militarism and demonizes pacifism, portraying dissent as unpatriotic or naïve. In this way, arms manufacturing donors and lobbyists wield immense power to shape public opinion, influence policy decisions, and perpetuate a culture of violence and war. By exposing their manipulative tactics and challenging the distorted narratives they propagate, it is possible to reclaim the moral and intellectual integrity of academic discourse and public debate, fostering a more informed and conscientious citizenry capable of advocating for peace, justice, and human rights.
That's what LCS are meant to deal with - operating unmanned vehicles to clear way for the fleet so the main fighting forces can focus on fighting. LCS are never meant to fight head-on with an opponent. They're meant to deal with other objectives for the destroyers. The LCS are NOT obsolete
The concept isn't obsolete. But the ships we have right now are just not up to the task man. There's a reason they're getting an early retirement already.
@Ragingmaja What tasks are you referring to? In my understanding, the LCS were intended for low intensity conflicts in littoral water, but now, with rising Chinese and Russian threats, the LCS have been repurposed for Stealthy ASW, mine countermeasures, reconnaissance and strike platforms. While it is true that Freedom class has problems, the Independence class should have no problem operating the SAM umbrella of the fleet. That's why I don't get why the Independence class are being decommissioned.
