The Chinese spy balloon.
What a non-story the media is going nuts about.
Printable View
The Chinese spy balloon.
What a non-story the media is going nuts about.
How many patriots are cruising around with binocs and scoped rifles in the flatlands hoping to save 'merica from the reds by shooting it down?Quote:
Originally Posted by old goat
poking holes in balloons with a missile… so american.
conspiracy to drop millions of Chinese Restaurant menus!Quote:
Originally Posted by old goat
We spend all this money and we don't have a balloon-catching plane? Annoying.
Seems just a few dozen bullet holes would have allowed them to catch it before it went in the drink but I'm no rocket surgeon.
Wait till we tell these people the Chinese also have spy satellites! Go Space Force, go!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Vt-Freeheel
You'd think the party of clowns would like balloons
I'd have to guess that accurately predicting where a balloon at 60,000+ feet will land after you poke holes in it is a bit challenging.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rideski
Sent using TGR Forums mobile app
took canada a couple thousand rounds and six daysQuote:
Originally Posted by Rideski
but a missile that’s been in service for 67 years did the job asap
Nice.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker
MSG chem trails!Quote:
Originally Posted by baron
This is an annoyance and a PSA. I flew to Bozeman recently for a Big Sky ski trip. At least on Alaska Airlines ski equipment (skis, poles, boots) is counted as one checked bag, even if they are in two physical pieces of luggage, with the caveat that you aren't packing anything else in with the ski equipment (obviously in most cases they're not going to care unless the bags are exceptionally heavy). With the automated check-in processes now you have to say how many checked bags you have and then the kiosk at the airport will print out the tags for your bags. So if you say one checked bag you get charged $30, but it only prints a single tag. If you say two you'll get two tags, but pay another $40. You want to say one assuming you've got a ski bag plus a boot bag and then just tell the counter agent you need another tag because of the ski equipment rule. That's the annoyance to me: there's nowhere in the automated system that tells you ski equipment counts as a single bag. You just need to know that's the policy. I'm pretty confident they are actually banking on people not knowing the rules and thus paying more than they need to for their checked bags. We're talking an extra $80 for a round trip, so that's a significant difference.
My boot bag has enough extra room for my helmet and gloves and that frees up enough extra space so I can get away with putting everything else I need in a standard carry-on roller. I know some people advocate carrying boots on, but I'd prefer not to lug my ski boots through the airport if I can avoid it. Of course the other option is flying Southwest, but we all know some of the downsides to that approach.
Always carry boots. Always.
You can rent anything else. Or ski in jeans like Cheney and Ötzi.
What else is in your carryon?
Boots take most of it. But a puffy and hat and gloves etc.
and you’re allowed a personal item for phone chargers laptop iPad or whatever.
Between carryon and personal bag you can take anything. If I’m not skiing I can live for a week like that.
I have on occasion checked boots for a return trip but my footbeds are always with me.
That airline rule is old school. Haven’t used it in decades since large roller bags. Two pair skis and pants and other shit to 50 pounds seems fair to me.
I never want to push it because you never know when they might decide to be dicks about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Core Shot
So…a well known local’s dog killed another dog out on the trails while skiing with him the other day. WTF?
So the dead dog’s owner is suing the trail system here, which of course has no money. Which means, I’m sure, that soon there will be a changed policy of no unleashed dogs on the extensive dog friendly trails here.
I’ve been skiing/riding/running with our dogs for 30+ years here.
Fuck.
Good dogs don’t kill dogs or people.
That sucks.
But why sue the trail network?
Now dead dog owner won’t be able to take their new puppy on the trails? Smh
I'm a big fan of leash laws (and enforcement), especially after being bitten while running on the most popular trail in the area. Everyone thinks their little fido is an angel, right up until the moment he proves to be otherwise (and often they won't even acknowledge a problem after their dog bites someone!).
But suing the owner seems like the right call here, since they are the responsible party. Maybe if the trail system had a leash law and blatantly didn't enforce it they could be a secondary responsible party.
I really don’t know why they’re suing the trail network. It would never occur to me to sue anybody for that sort of thing.
After that guy’s wife sued black diamond or Patagonia or whatever it was a long time ago, I told my then gf to never sue anybody if I croak. Apparently the dead dog had a preexisting condition too.
People suing trail systems are trash, so is your suggestion to 'maybe' do it. And if they were skiing together, wouldn't that suggest both dogs were off leash? If so, the asshole can't sue the trail system for not enforcing a law he didn't follow.Quote:
Originally Posted by climberevan
Dogs are clearly in charge on our planet.Quote:
Originally Posted by climberevan
If you came to Earth from outer space and saw one lifeform picking up another lifeform's poop, you would be certain they were the dominant species. Who are we to tell a dog who not to kill.
Better the dog died in battle rather than a slow death by cancer or something-now the dog is in Valhalla!
>could just go to fish and game and get a Dog Tag? ...if the dog was in season;)
Someone should send the victim's owner a GWAR cut of ''im in love with a dead dog"
Seriously though- that sucks- RIP doggie, no amount of litigation can bring you back
Shouldn't the dead dog's owner just be able to kill the killer dog?
So confusing.
You guys need to up your game.Quote:
Originally Posted by John_B
I just got $20 in the Wang vs stubhub settlement. And I see $36 received in my paypal for some other privacy litigation settlement that doesn't name the defendent. This is getting quite profitable!
So the defendant in the privacy litigation gets privacy, even if you didn't. Brilliant.Quote:
Originally Posted by evdog
It just didn't list it in the paypal entry LOL. I'm sure I could dig it up in my emails but searching hotmail is about as useless as the search function here.