@herzogsstadter.bsky.social
12 days of playing Pinyata without even scratching a single attacking enemy plain is certainly a kin of experience.
January 31, 2026 at 2:49 PM
12 days of playing Pinyata without even scratching a single attacking enemy plain is certainly a kin of experience.
In winter heavy seas would make it harder and in summer you have typhoon season, and well, ask the americans how well that works out, sailing a fleet through a typhoon. Was not the best idea twice in WW2.
January 25, 2026 at 10:54 PM
In winter heavy seas would make it harder and in summer you have typhoon season, and well, ask the americans how well that works out, sailing a fleet through a typhoon. Was not the best idea twice in WW2.
Preparing such an attack would take way longer. Also at least considering the weather there are only two "good windows" to make a move (not saying we couldn't see another attempt at a 3 day operation) but if they want to sustain a longer campaign the viable months are April and October.
January 25, 2026 at 10:54 PM
Preparing such an attack would take way longer. Also at least considering the weather there are only two "good windows" to make a move (not saying we couldn't see another attempt at a 3 day operation) but if they want to sustain a longer campaign the viable months are April and October.
That will certainly go over great with the american electorate in a midterms year. almost 70% disliked Trumps previous tariffs and with even fewer liking the idea of taking Greenland popularity won't be higher here. If he really adds 25% right when the main election season starts that will be fun.
January 17, 2026 at 6:58 PM
That will certainly go over great with the american electorate in a midterms year. almost 70% disliked Trumps previous tariffs and with even fewer liking the idea of taking Greenland popularity won't be higher here. If he really adds 25% right when the main election season starts that will be fun.
Even if you defend it you will never get a 100% interception rate (Israel also only got like 90% last time they clashed with Iran and they have one of the best airdefense networks around)
And well, if you don't have an aircraft there it is not just 90% but 100% safe from getting destroyed.
And well, if you don't have an aircraft there it is not just 90% but 100% safe from getting destroyed.
January 14, 2026 at 7:47 PM
Even if you defend it you will never get a 100% interception rate (Israel also only got like 90% last time they clashed with Iran and they have one of the best airdefense networks around)
And well, if you don't have an aircraft there it is not just 90% but 100% safe from getting destroyed.
And well, if you don't have an aircraft there it is not just 90% but 100% safe from getting destroyed.
I mean anexing it is dumb, but also giving it statehood? That is basically asking for 2 more free democrtic seats in the senate and one in the house, + 3 permanent democratic electoral college votes. Even the center right parties there are in US terms closer to Bernie Sanders then Joe Manchin.
January 12, 2026 at 8:18 PM
I mean anexing it is dumb, but also giving it statehood? That is basically asking for 2 more free democrtic seats in the senate and one in the house, + 3 permanent democratic electoral college votes. Even the center right parties there are in US terms closer to Bernie Sanders then Joe Manchin.
At what point can the fibre optic cables themselves be considered sufficient anti drone nettings? 🤔
December 19, 2025 at 3:31 PM
At what point can the fibre optic cables themselves be considered sufficient anti drone nettings? 🤔
Doesn't work that easily. There is no pipeline infrastructure to just increase russian exports through the baltics by almost 50% over night. Not to mention that you have to get the oil there first and also transport times go up by around 10-15 days so you need way more tankers for the same exports.
November 29, 2025 at 4:57 PM
Doesn't work that easily. There is no pipeline infrastructure to just increase russian exports through the baltics by almost 50% over night. Not to mention that you have to get the oil there first and also transport times go up by around 10-15 days so you need way more tankers for the same exports.
Well, they at least have 25% of other exports. Sure not economy breaking if they drop but well, if they can't sell minerals, ores and such it would also ruin a few more regions. If you watch what lagging coal exports have done u the Kuzbass area, it causes local trouble and harms recruitment.
November 17, 2025 at 6:31 AM
Well, they at least have 25% of other exports. Sure not economy breaking if they drop but well, if they can't sell minerals, ores and such it would also ruin a few more regions. If you watch what lagging coal exports have done u the Kuzbass area, it causes local trouble and harms recruitment.
As said, I am happy for them, it is certainly the best outcome, but I caution against extrapolating from a fairly dems favored environment to a general election strategy. In a blue wave climate it can work, but overatributing it can be bad in a not as favorable year, like 2028 when stats just matter
November 5, 2025 at 3:31 PM
As said, I am happy for them, it is certainly the best outcome, but I caution against extrapolating from a fairly dems favored environment to a general election strategy. In a blue wave climate it can work, but overatributing it can be bad in a not as favorable year, like 2028 when stats just matter
This was all I wanted to convey, that you can't assume that just because one party lost with it the other will win with it. For people affected it matters a lot, but from a general electoral standpoint, not focussing on it if you have other more widely relevant topics would be better.
November 5, 2025 at 9:09 AM
This was all I wanted to convey, that you can't assume that just because one party lost with it the other will win with it. For people affected it matters a lot, but from a general electoral standpoint, not focussing on it if you have other more widely relevant topics would be better.
It is not that it is a bad topic morally, it is only that for the large majority of people a secondary or tertiary one at best, not an election winner. I am not talking from morality, but from electability and by all accounts, you could have a candidate who never talked about it and who still wins.
November 5, 2025 at 9:09 AM
It is not that it is a bad topic morally, it is only that for the large majority of people a secondary or tertiary one at best, not an election winner. I am not talking from morality, but from electability and by all accounts, you could have a candidate who never talked about it and who still wins.
Attacking them is not right. Only thing I am saying is that for most people it won't change their vote. A single mom struggling to feed her kids, a man who can't pay his medical bills, they won't care what the position of a candidate is on trans rights is, only if they can help them personally.
November 5, 2025 at 9:09 AM
Attacking them is not right. Only thing I am saying is that for most people it won't change their vote. A single mom struggling to feed her kids, a man who can't pay his medical bills, they won't care what the position of a candidate is on trans rights is, only if they can help them personally.
Why would you ever spend too much political capital on something that less then 1% of the population is directly affected by when you can spend the same capital on housing, cost of living, healthcare in general where you reach without a doubt 50%+ of all people.
November 5, 2025 at 7:49 AM
Why would you ever spend too much political capital on something that less then 1% of the population is directly affected by when you can spend the same capital on housing, cost of living, healthcare in general where you reach without a doubt 50%+ of all people.
Problem here is not which position on that topic you stand for, it is that the topic in general is overblown from an average voter POV. Yes, for affected/interested people it may be relevant but for 90+% of the population they have not that much contact with it eighter way and have enough issues.
November 5, 2025 at 7:49 AM
Problem here is not which position on that topic you stand for, it is that the topic in general is overblown from an average voter POV. Yes, for affected/interested people it may be relevant but for 90+% of the population they have not that much contact with it eighter way and have enough issues.
Nothing against trans rights but I think the conclusion is not that you have to "stand up for it" to win. If anything it has to be that you shouldn't dedicate too much time to an electorally small topic. If Dems did spend 50+% of time /money on trans rights they would also loose.
November 5, 2025 at 7:49 AM
Nothing against trans rights but I think the conclusion is not that you have to "stand up for it" to win. If anything it has to be that you shouldn't dedicate too much time to an electorally small topic. If Dems did spend 50+% of time /money on trans rights they would also loose.
Ein einfacher Infanterist kostet den Kremel mindestens 3-4 durchschnittliche Jahresgehälter einfach nur um ihn anzuheuern und verdient dann das Mehrfache von einem normalen Arbeiter + Unterstützung im Todesfall. Billig ist das nicht (nicht zu vergessen verlorene Steuereinnahmen von den Toten.)
October 14, 2025 at 5:07 PM
Ein einfacher Infanterist kostet den Kremel mindestens 3-4 durchschnittliche Jahresgehälter einfach nur um ihn anzuheuern und verdient dann das Mehrfache von einem normalen Arbeiter + Unterstützung im Todesfall. Billig ist das nicht (nicht zu vergessen verlorene Steuereinnahmen von den Toten.)
Wie der Text sagt, eine offizielle Empfehlung bestand erst seit letzten Jahr generell für alle Säuglinge. Das dürfte die Zahl der Impfungen nochmal nach oben getrieben haben verglichen mit zuvor. Davor war es im ermessen einzelner Krankenhäuser es zu empfehlen
October 11, 2025 at 1:32 PM
Wie der Text sagt, eine offizielle Empfehlung bestand erst seit letzten Jahr generell für alle Säuglinge. Das dürfte die Zahl der Impfungen nochmal nach oben getrieben haben verglichen mit zuvor. Davor war es im ermessen einzelner Krankenhäuser es zu empfehlen
Painting your special anti drone vehicle that is close to the frontline bright white sounds like an invitation to have that thing spotted by the first drone that comes by in a multiple km radius.
October 11, 2025 at 12:51 PM
Painting your special anti drone vehicle that is close to the frontline bright white sounds like an invitation to have that thing spotted by the first drone that comes by in a multiple km radius.
Nur mal so, in dem Szenario (30 Mrd. Volkswirtschaftliche Ersparnis, nur aus Steuermitteln bezahlt = 25% davon) könnte der Staat Arbeitern in dem Bereich jährlich 500k zahlen und würde immer noch finanziell besser dastehen als jetzt. Wie gesagt, stark vereinfacht, aber Jobs sind kein Argument hier.
September 26, 2025 at 1:18 PM
Nur mal so, in dem Szenario (30 Mrd. Volkswirtschaftliche Ersparnis, nur aus Steuermitteln bezahlt = 25% davon) könnte der Staat Arbeitern in dem Bereich jährlich 500k zahlen und würde immer noch finanziell besser dastehen als jetzt. Wie gesagt, stark vereinfacht, aber Jobs sind kein Argument hier.
Ganz ehrlich. Rein wirtschaftlich wäre es effizienter die Leute dafür zu zahlen zuhause zu bleiben statt sie ihre Jobs machen zu lassen. (und wie gesagt die Rechnung nimmt nicht an dass die Leute ihr Geld für andere Produkte ausgeben, was die Kosten des Ausstiegs deutlich senken würde. )
September 26, 2025 at 1:02 PM
Ganz ehrlich. Rein wirtschaftlich wäre es effizienter die Leute dafür zu zahlen zuhause zu bleiben statt sie ihre Jobs machen zu lassen. (und wie gesagt die Rechnung nimmt nicht an dass die Leute ihr Geld für andere Produkte ausgeben, was die Kosten des Ausstiegs deutlich senken würde. )
Sogar in diesem Szenario entsteht ein Volkswirtschaftlicher Gewinn irgendwo im Millionenbereich pro weggefallener Stelle (genaue Berechnungen sind schwer, da hier zu viele Faktoren mitspielen aber in einem mittleren Szenario wären es ca. 2,5 Millionen Volkswirtschaftliche Ersparnis/Job)
September 26, 2025 at 1:02 PM
Sogar in diesem Szenario entsteht ein Volkswirtschaftlicher Gewinn irgendwo im Millionenbereich pro weggefallener Stelle (genaue Berechnungen sind schwer, da hier zu viele Faktoren mitspielen aber in einem mittleren Szenario wären es ca. 2,5 Millionen Volkswirtschaftliche Ersparnis/Job)
Aber sogar wenn wir mal extrem sind und sagen alle 14000 Stellen fallen weg, ohne dass es dadurch zu Verlagerungseffekten kommt (die Leute könnten das Geld ja für andere Produkte ausgeben was wieder Jobs schafft oder Tabak shops neue Geschäftsfelder finden (Paketshops, sonstiger Einzelhandel)
September 26, 2025 at 1:02 PM
Aber sogar wenn wir mal extrem sind und sagen alle 14000 Stellen fallen weg, ohne dass es dadurch zu Verlagerungseffekten kommt (die Leute könnten das Geld ja für andere Produkte ausgeben was wieder Jobs schafft oder Tabak shops neue Geschäftsfelder finden (Paketshops, sonstiger Einzelhandel)
In der Tabakindustrie in Deutschland arbeiten etwas über 7000 Leute, in speziellen Tabakläden vielleicht nochmal so viele (keine genauen Daten). Tankstellen und Supermärkte rechne ich nicht mit, da die deutlich diversifizierter sind und von dem Verkauf normal nicht so abhängig.
September 26, 2025 at 1:02 PM
In der Tabakindustrie in Deutschland arbeiten etwas über 7000 Leute, in speziellen Tabakläden vielleicht nochmal so viele (keine genauen Daten). Tankstellen und Supermärkte rechne ich nicht mit, da die deutlich diversifizierter sind und von dem Verkauf normal nicht so abhängig.
Alleine um die Folgekosten des Rauchens zu decken müsste jede Packung fast 23 Euro kosten.
September 26, 2025 at 10:22 AM
Alleine um die Folgekosten des Rauchens zu decken müsste jede Packung fast 23 Euro kosten.