Marietta College was founded nearly two centuries ago in Marietta, Ohio, the first settlement in the Northwest Territory. Initially charged with educating youth in "all the various branches of the liberal arts and sciences," Marietta College has continued to blend a strong curriculum in these areas with selected career-oriented programs. We take pride in maintaining excellent and demanding academic programs that result from high expectations of our faculty, who are dedicated to working with talented undergraduate students. The learning environment is culturally and geographically diverse with students coming from 35 states and 6 countries.
I am currently studying to become an electrician. I am not young anymore(47) but I exercise and watch what I eat so I figure I have another 30-40 working years left in me.
The left owns the media. We literally have a Democrat candidate who is not debating or taking questions from anybody, but we all think that she is the first black female and the most intelligent choice Peter your bias really does come out when you talk about politics. I expect that from Tucker, but I see you as someone that’s supposed to be neutral.
Tucker seems to be spot on, on many topics. If he’s been accepting money from the Russians, there would be a money trail for that. I don’t believe they’re probably probably is, just like most conservative media there’s hundreds, if not, thousands of left-leaning media heads that would’ve reported on this already
BRICS wasn't Merryl Lynch. From Wikipedia: "The term BRIC was originally developed in the context of foreign investment strategies. It was introduced in the 2001 publication, Building Better Global Economic BRICs by then-chairman of Goldman Sachs Asset Management, Jim O'Neill." Everything else he said about BRICS, I agree with. It's essentially a "We Hate America" club and I'm surprised that it doesn't include MAGA and Progressive support in our own country. Nothing ties BRICS to each other and they are pretty much each in bilateral relations with China.
i think he explains the ideas driving obama/obiden state dept and the interests of the wealthy elite very well. i don't think it describes reality. in fact, if russia and china are in as dire a situation as he says, then playing it out until they lose isn't going to be their strategy. and if it will happen as rapidly as he says, then that will be traumatic/dramatic and will almost certainly lead to traumatic/dramatic measures to change the board.
The reactors may be able in theory to produce that much power but the ships hull and the prop shafts cannot take the resistance of the water. The hull would collapse and the shafts would snap.
Peter, everything you said is on point. BUT, and a BIG "Niki Minaj" BUTT, is you KNOW that Biden is not making the decisions you give him credit for, I absolutely HATE when you do that. Maybe, go with "The Biden Administration" instead of putting him as the ULTIMATE decision maker, we ALL KNOW HE'S NOT. This is my question, and I hope this reaches you. What can we do to bring China into the fold... There are GOOD, SMART and Freedom loving people there. China is important, for an amalgamation of reasons, and should be saved. How do we do it... THINK Peter, please!! Come up with a plan that can be sold to everyone. It's a "pipe dream" I know, but on that it needs to be fantasied about, and then put into a realistic argument for all to hear... NO MATTER HOW CRAZY, FOOLISH, or NUTTY.
Farms to Towns to Suburbs to Cities back to Suburbs & Exuburbs. Most of U.S. farms are automated and less than 4% of the population work in agricultural. The re-shoring manufacturing & assembling will not be factories in major cities unlike the first half of the 20th Century.
Where the hell did Peter pull the “tucker taking money from Russia for 8 years “ thing. I looked it up and cant find anything about that, even on leftist news websites
@@concretejungle9608well then where does he get it? I like him and watch him all the time, but for this information to be of any value it needs to be verified. Plus if Tucker was really taking money from russia, left wing media would be all over that, would they not?
I think Labor Unions would be less antagonistic to immigratation if you find a means to legalize immigration AND make it easier to unionize them. The problem: this involves selective trimming, creation, and finessing of already convoluted, byzantine (and sometime contradictory) immigration laws and our politicians avoids hard intellectual work like the plague (other than generating spin).
I don’t like tucker Carlson but the idea that everything he does is Russian propaganda is nonsense A journalist is *supposed* to bring us information from every perspective, the echo chamber is nonsense
I’ve always said my favorite international media outlets were France 24, Al Jazeera (you just have to be able to weed out the anti-Israel/Islamist propaganda but outside that they are excellent) and one he didn’t mention is DW which is a German English language outlet similar to France 24 as far as I can see.
There are entire segments devoted to debunking Tucker's bs misinfo over the past few years. He is a notorious liar and Russian propagandist. This isn't a conservative thing, it's a Tucker thing.
So Peter is saying he has access to people that are telling him about decrypted messages between Iran and China? Surely this is BS or at least whomever is telling him this is thinking he has too big a mouth?
Peter is very entertaining to listen to. And does spit out some facts. But, commenting on military issues like he is descibing a cartoon for children?? If the Russians ever wanted to sink a carrier and it's whole battle group they wouldn't use Shahed drones, what rubbish is this??? Somebody should seriously educate this lune about at least the basics. Look up Circon 9 mach rockets that were build for percisely this. And an impact of a single of these rockets onto the surfice of the sea. There is nothing that can stop a rocket like this destroying a carrier or ship. Or a group of ships by detonating it on the surface of water causing a tsunami wave. And also I doubt that they would fire just one at a single carrier. And if that's not enough for you try the avanguard system. That is 27 times the speed of sound. Shahed drones go the same speed as the carriers?? What century is he in the 18th? 🤣🤣🤣 Jesus Christ
US has systems to shoot them down, the Thaad system ( may be called thuud) has shot down ballistic missiles in terminal velocity phase. These boats have systems that incorporate stuff like that in the Aegis suite they have onboard. Even the patriot system can take on kinzhal missiles. Hypersonic missiles aren't this unsolved problem
@@solaireastora5394 A patriot system did not take down a Kindzal missile. Cause it would have been taking down all the Kindzhal missiles in Ukraine in the last year if that was true, which is not. There was never any real confirmation on that at all, just propaganda and fantasy. That is probably due to the fact that at the last phase a Kindzal reaches mach 9-12. The best an upgraded patriot 3 system rocket can reach is mach 5. The maximum speed for a Thaad system is mach 8 so it could at least technically take down a Circon. Moreover, you have eluded to mention the Avanguard system like I haven't even mention it and its speed is mach 21. There is nothing in the US arsenal that can shoot it down. You've also neglected to comment on the tsunami effect by a hypersonic rocket being detonated much before any operational range of a battle group, which could affect all the vesels in the waves path and literaly obliterate them. Imagine using an avanguard for this, It would sink anything you put in its path. And that is why the whole obsolete naval, carrier battle group warfare is over in this new age.
@@solaireastora5394 The Patriot sys did not shoot down a kindzal. That was never confirmed, just heresay on tv and propaganda. Also Patriot rockets even after the third modernisation go mach 5. A Kindzal flies mach 9-12 in the final stage. A top speed for a thaad is 8 mach. Funny you didn't even mention the Avanguard with its 21 mach speed. There is nothing that can stop it.
@@alexwolf7164I was staying in in central Kyiv and could hear that Patriot system shooting down Kindzhal missiles above up. A lot of civilian people and buildings have survived because of that
The Princes of Numenor are behind the Ukraine War? I have never heard that one! I've heard that some Tolkien fans are mad at the Rings of Power show-runners, but blaming the Ukraine War on them is a bit extreme! 😆
Peter, I understand your logical take on the need for the US to distance itself from the Levant but I think you’re overlooking the cultural/religious ties (both between American and Israeli Jews but, more importantly, the evangelical vote). That distancing won’t happen. So, what is the way forward for Washington? Can DC coax Israeli politics in another direction?
HE IS FULL OF SHIT, THE CIA WERE ONES WHO ATTACKED THE CONCERT HALL, WAKE UP PEOPLE THE AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX IS THE BIGGEST PURPS OF CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY!
37:30 Well that is just an outright urban myth. The max speed of a carrier is no 90 knots. Here; One of the prevailing myths of the modern fleet is that the US Navy's nuclear-powered aircraft carriers are capable of extraordinary maximum speeds. As is quite common with Urban Myths, these keep growing with each retelling of the basic story. It started with speeds of "over 40 knots" being alleged. This has risen by stages to 45 knots then to its current level of 50 knots. The story invariably ends with an officer turning off the speed readout for "security reasons." Sadly the truth is much more prosaic. The official listing of the carrier speeds is "in excess of 30 knots". The actual speed of the CVNs is classified; much as the maximum speed of the SSNs in the 1960s through 1980s was restricted information. However, the design speed of the Forrestal, Kitty Hawk and JFK class carriers is public domain. The JFK was designed for 33.5 knots, the Kitty Hawks 33.6, the Forrestal 32.0 and the other CVs of that class were designed for 33.0. All had powertrain installations designed to provide 280,000 shp except Forrestal which had 260,000 shp. In all cases, the power was delivered via four shafts. So, the question is, how does the performance of the CVNs compare with that of the CVs? To determine this we have to look at the power train itself. The nuclear powerplant does not drive the ship directly; it generates steam which powers turbines which drive the screws. The power rating of the ship is the output of her turbines, not the steam generating capacity of the reactor. The turbines installed on the CVNs are identical to those on the CVs; they generate 280,000 shp over four shafts. Even if the nuclear reactor component did generate huge amounts of additional steam, there would be nowhere to put it. On these grounds alone, it seems extremely unlikely that a CVN would be any faster than a CV. Unofficial figures for the Enterprise confirm this; they suggest the ship was designed for 33.0 knots and it has been unofficially suggested that she reached 33.6 knots while running machinery trials after her latest refit. It has been suggested that this figure was "leaked" in order to counter suggestions that she was worn out. In passing, although Enterprise has an eight-reactor power train, only six of the reactors are on line at any one time (the reactors being rotated so that all are used regularly). The reason is quite simple; after recoring, only six reactors are needed to provide all the steam the turbines can handle. [Editor's note: This is not correct. All eight reactors are continually on-line. The Navy originally published a note saying that only six were on line at any one time, but later corrected it.] The Nimitz class carriers were originally designed to have 260,000 shp, the reduction being due to a steam deficiency caused by a shift to the use of a pair of large reactors. In fact, they have now all been recored and are rated at the same 280,000 shp as the other carriers. It might be expected that they would, therefore, have speeds in the same 33 knot range as the other carriers. In fact, this is not correct. The dimensions of the Nimitz class were set by building dock and other industrial and infrastructure considerations. Their hull is the largest practical design without massive investment in base and construction infrastructure. This placed grave pressure on internal volume and forced the adoption of some unusual designs solutions and the use of a significantly fuller hull form. This translated directly into loss of speed. Although the official figures are classified, it is unofficially reported that the design speed of the Nimitz was 31.5 knots on 260,000 shp. This would fit the reduced power and less advantageous hull form. Quite independently, the US Navy has suggested that the "Nimitz Class" have achieved trials speeds of 31.5 knots - this seems to be intended as an average for all the ships in this class rather than specific to any representative ship of that class. Later ships of the Nimitz class are substantially larger than the earlier members but do have the uprated, 280,000 shp plants. Its unlikely that the extra power fully compensates for the extra size and it has been rumored that the latest ship, CVN-75 USS Harry S Truman, was hard put to reach 31.0 knots on trials. There is a caveat here. The CVNs effectively have no concerns about running out of fuel. They can be optimized for running at high speed continuously (that is, their hull form can be selected for maximum efficiency at maximum speed). In contrast, a conventionally-powered carrier has to be optimized for optimum performance at cruising speed - 20 knots. Their hulls become progressively less efficient as the ship speed increases. This means that the sustained speed of a CVN over long duration is close to the ships maximum speed (say 30 knots) while the sustained speed of a CV over long duration is the ship's cruising speed (20 knots). So, while there is no significant difference in maximum speed of the two ships, the CVN will have a much higher transit speed. It is quite possible that it is that difference in transit speed that gets misapplied to maximum speed and is the core of the "40 Knot Myth."
Instantly triggered my BS detector. Can you imagine a Super going 90 knots (100 mph)? wtf... Forget UFOs, that'd be some for real alien tech. How does no one call him on this? I like Peter but wtf is he talking about??
Yep, we're working on it. We just want to put some different accents on the people asking questions using AI to make it seem more inclusive. We will be giving Peter a pixie style haircut as well. Any other suggestions? More storm troopers in the background maybe?
Sorry, but his chaos "interview" with his dictatorial buddy in Moscow was the cheapest joke of the century. Bruh get some educated perspective! Maybe start with Alex Benesch RecentR and Jeff Nyquist on "Friends and Enemies".
Always interesting to hear Peter speak. He’s of course absolutely right about Tucker and it is depressing such a weak and pathetic shill for the Russians still has fans in the US. However, I worry that there are factors in Peter’s analysis that he doesn’t appear to account for on China - the big one being industrial capacity and in ship building particularly. Yes, the US Navy has a vastly superior ‘blue water’ capability at present, but China’s ship building capacity is approximately 230 TIMES greater than the US’s and they’re churning out 2 submarines a year at present, along with surface ships that are growing in size. Yes, China has great demographic problems, but its population is still approximately 3 times the US and it will have considerable capacity to bring force to bear in a large conflict - and indeed the conflict would have unifying effect on the country. Over the course of the next 30-40 years, their demographics will absolutely cause them problems, but they’re still very well supplied with fighting age men right now and their industrial capacity is at a high point. These are all very real concerns I’d like to hear him respond to.
