Many water facilities have been damaged or destroyed by Israel’s war in Gaza, according to the UN and others, compounding the civilian population’s suffering, risking the spread of disease and leading human rights experts to accuse Israel of using water supply as a weapon.
and they could if they wanted to, which is the point
you’re currently requesting a noncredibledefense addict justify defense policy and acting as if that’s not something they’d want to do with their free time
No, they couldn’t. The fact you think they can is absolutely insane, and shows you have zero knowledge about what is happening right now, or global politics. Fucking sad.
“the f22 is demonstrably the most advanced air superiority fighter the world has ever seen, and the us could deploy them in situ if they wanted” vs “nuh uh”
Because they bought jets from somebody who makes them has nothing to do with the US government, unless you’re suggesting the government itself turn any buyers away.
Fun fact, Airbus isn’t a US company, and you probably fly on those quite a bit versus Boeing. Sit with that.
omfg you actually went for the argument of “the f22 isn’t actually that good”
from an admittedly very western perspective, probably the best air superiority fighter with no us involvement is the ef2000, and the f22 absolutely trounces it
boeing doesn’t make the f22, and building a civilian airliner is a thoroughly different skill to building a military jet
i legitimately cannot believe this is the argument you’re attempting
also, i already told you i’m a ncd addict, i very obviously don’t leave the house, and therefore don’t travel on airbus or boeing jets
Nope, didn’t say anything about the jets. Doesn’t matter. Not sure why you’re focusing on that specifically though, because the F22 is actually an aerial maneuver plane, and has nothing to do with bombing. They would choose a more slow and steady plane for bombing.
You can’t enforce a “No Fly Zone” unless you are directly engaged or control that airspace, which the US is not and does not.
Next.
and they could if they wanted to, which is the point
you’re currently requesting a noncredibledefense addict justify defense policy and acting as if that’s not something they’d want to do with their free time
No, they couldn’t. The fact you think they can is absolutely insane, and shows you have zero knowledge about what is happening right now, or global politics. Fucking sad.
Next.
“the f22 is demonstrably the most advanced air superiority fighter the world has ever seen, and the us could deploy them in situ if they wanted” vs “nuh uh”
BORING try again
Because they bought jets from somebody who makes them has nothing to do with the US government, unless you’re suggesting the government itself turn any buyers away.
Fun fact, Airbus isn’t a US company, and you probably fly on those quite a bit versus Boeing. Sit with that.
Next.
omfg you actually went for the argument of “the f22 isn’t actually that good”
from an admittedly very western perspective, probably the best air superiority fighter with no us involvement is the ef2000, and the f22 absolutely trounces it
boeing doesn’t make the f22, and building a civilian airliner is a thoroughly different skill to building a military jet
i legitimately cannot believe this is the argument you’re attempting
also, i already told you i’m a ncd addict, i very obviously don’t leave the house, and therefore don’t travel on airbus or boeing jets
Nope, didn’t say anything about the jets. Doesn’t matter. Not sure why you’re focusing on that specifically though, because the F22 is actually an aerial maneuver plane, and has nothing to do with bombing. They would choose a more slow and steady plane for bombing.
Next.
you literally did but ok
yes the f22 is what would enforce the nfz, try again
No, it doesn’t. Russia, France, Britain, Brazil, Canada all make air capable weapons.
Again, you’re just arguing and not being helpful here. Bye.