Blue

Canada's fighter jets are ageing, I guess they don't need replacing, but falling too far behind is worse. The US started buying the F-22 Raptor in 2005, but the CF-18s were purchased in 1983. Not exactly top of the line. What about the F-18E and F-18F variants (which are new enough that the F-35 will not be replacing)? For every country but the US, probably not until it's been proven. The US has no need to replace it's fleet with aircraft that cost more than quadruple what the current aircraft cost. $38 million for a Grumman F-14D Tomcat. (arguably the best long range interceptor ever) $29-57 million for a McDonnell Douglas F/A-18 Hornet. (our current all-around fighter/bomber) $14.6/$18.8 million for the General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon. (A/B = $14.6m, C/D = $18.8m) $30-35 million for each McDonnell Douglas AV-8B Harrier II. (VTOL, rarely if ever used) $11.8 million for the Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II. (I would've thought it cost more) $53.4 million for a Boeing B-52H Stratofortress. (just for a comparison) Why pay tons of money for something we don't really need? And yet they're buying F-22 Raptors by the dozen- which have a Flyaway (aka barebone minimum) cost of $150 million apeice. I do like however the talk of extending the usage of A-10 Thunderbolts into the coming decades simply because it's so effective and reliable, even if it consists of making them UCAVs.

Found it after finding Civil Protection. Found Civil Protection after finding Combine Nation. No idea how I found Combine Nation.

Well, the K.I.S.S. Principle dicates that I accept that notion as factual.

In 1996 the US Military decided to basically upgrade a large swathe of their Marine, Naval, Air Force and Army aircraft with a new fit-all model, which soon will be the F-35 "Lightning II". Slated to replace the General Dynamics F-16, Republic-Fairchild A-10, McDonnell-Douglas F/A-18 (and CF-18) and Boeing AV-8B in the year 2016 and afterwards, the Lockheed-Martin F-35 is supposed to be better than all the other craft were at their own games (Ground Attack, Interception, Aerial Combat, Electronic Support/Countermeasure, Close-range ground Support etc.) as well as keep training and maintenance costs down by having 80% interchangeable parts and systems between its three main varaints, the F-35A (Conventional landing and takeoff), F-35B (Short Takeoff or Vertical Takeoff) and F-35C (CATOBAR-enabled Aircraft carrier takeoff and landing system) as well as staff only having to be versed in repair and maintenance of this one plane as opposed to the several others. However, such a laundry-list of things the fighter has to be able to do (and do well enough to compete on the international stage of 5th Generation Fighter Aircraft, on the level of such planes as the Sukhoi-35 and/or the Eurofighter Typhoon) is quite a task obviously, and price estimates have not been entirely reliable in the years of development, as well as numerous delays that have occured through the course of its building and testing. This has been a matter of concern in many countries, notably Canada who will be replacing its Air Force of about 120 CF-18s with 120 F-35s, My question is if you think for many countries, would it be worth the investment/risk for a plane that is planning on replacing a notable portion of western tactical aircraft (a very big pair of shoes to fill) for its fluctuating price tag, at somewhere around $150 million US each? Should I make myself more informed of the issue because of how big of a deal it is, or should I care less?

This is true. The enlightenment has probably brought into greater prevalence then ever the ability to assess health in all dimensions that we've ever been able to comprehend up to now: Physical, Emotional and Spiritual.

That's a speedrun. Doing that would also assume he could calculate the physics of a grenade jump in his head, and would also entirely bypass the chapter Power Up, not to mention also knowing where enemies would spawn and when via being aware of local entity and brush triggers. Could be possible if it were explained in-universe that Freeman was that guy from that movie where the main character could see two minutes into the future, and/or Nicholas Cage.

This sentiment is corroborated by my knowledge of animation and also opinion.

Depression, I will speculate, can be a modulation between sadness (Which is the proper response to a loss or a denial) and anxiety (Which is an unreasonable, extraneous or unnecessary fear of circumstances which are not within the realm of control of the individual). (There is an important distinction between Fear and Anxiety.)

An important thing can be easily assessed about your person whenever you analyze when you're angry. When you get angry, ask yourself the question "What am I defending?" Some big person shoves your friend: you get angry! It's a perfectly justifiable response. Why? What are you defending? In that situation, You're defending, or at least have the emotional inclination to be defending the physical and emotional person of your friend. You're late for meeting someone: you get angry. Is it justified? What are you defending? "Well, I'm late for work because I spent too long eating breakfast, and that's because my room mate took too long using the toaster oven." I don't think that would actually be the real cause of the defense: the real cause would be You're angry because you care about the perception the people you were going to meet, have of you, and when you're late, you might marr that perception, and the loss of that quality is the thing you're trying to defend in being angry. Anger is an important emotion, but it can be easily lead to vanity, selfishness and ignorance. The immidate course of action following anger (which may or may not be justified) should be logic, not actions.

[attachment=0]fq1.jpg[/attachment] Say what you want because...? Oh yeah! Because I don't care I meant typical.

The animation is nothing spectacular, the stories are typical of children's shows, morals are solid and characterization is very well done. Mystifying is the word I would use to describe why it has become so popular among not-young-girls. "Kick-your-self-in-the-arse" is the compound word I would use to describe those who think that the only opinions of it should be "Love it or hate it". It has the same positionation to me as Spongebob Squarepants: a respectable success but outside the realm of my better intrigués. Additionally, another one of those quirks I have is the consistent logistics-checking my mind does in the background, and the ratio observed of female:male is anomalous to say in the least. However such concerns are obviously alleviated by the fact that I am over-thinking a Children's TV show. Another reason why it comes to no one's surprise to know that my favorite movie is Apollo 13.

Oh Patton, you're so cute when you're angry.

Yeah, it's in the FAQ A more roundabout way of doing it would be making a func_ladder brush and then recompiling the map, but that's why Ross is making it and not me.

Who ever said Freeman was a static character? I see those criticisms as perfectly valid.

I'm still perplexed as to why My Little Pony has taken off so much in popularity.

It's actually quite simple, the reason why: all content on wikipedia is information, and the principle that governs why information exists is the philosophy of knowledge. Articles redirect accordingly. Usually in the form of ....>knowledge>fact>information>sequence>mathematics>quantity>property>modern philosophy>Philosophy Just like how if you consistently ask "Why" to an answer, you eventually just boil down to "because it's good" or "because it's bad".

All articles eventually redirect to Philosophy if you click on the first link in the article that isn't in brackets.

Wondering why the heck My Little Pony has taken the internet by storm while watching Tom Wolfe's The Right Stuff.

45. You think making this is a productive use of your time

Such as an Engine update. If it weren't so far along, I bet they'd delay it again to support the new 2011 architecture alongside Portal 2. However as it stands, the actual SDK update for 2011 has yet to be released and what little we do know about it is still in Beta (see Portal 2 Authoring Tools).

Unless that's the look you're going for, that is really really saturated color. Additionally, the floor is overexposed. Turn down the intensity of the lights. Instead of a rich yellow at medium or medium high intensity, it should be a very very light (slightly grayed) yellow at anywhere from medium to high intensity.

On the contrary, the game is highly optimized. However there are numerous very small details that could be ironed, but are details far too pedantic for Valve to commit to on a serious capacity. For example, brush smoothing. (The use of invisible walls to prevent player interaction with complex surfaces) (You know you've been stopped dead in your tracks walking backwards because your hitbox encountered a door handle and reacted the same way as if it was a wall, and it got you killed. Doing highly proficient optimization like this is very tedious and meticulous work, which takes a long time and by a Company's standards, is not worth the effort of time invested vs. gameplay improvement) On the other hand, I do not like the painting of hats. Brown, acceptable. Black, still fits. White? Conditional if you have a flattering fashion sense. Team Spirit? Contextual. All other colors? Art-style crushingly stupid junk. And I hate the gaudy promotional hats. They don't shout "I support other games (but don't play them)!", they shout "I have too much money, and have these ungainly looking affitments to prove it!"

SPAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACE

Derezzed by Daft Punk.