[ExI] robo-rescue

[spike at rainier66.com]

From: John Clark <johnkclark at gmail.com> 
Subject: Re: [ExI] robo-rescue

 

On Thu, Jun 11, 2026 at 5:41 PM <spike at rainier66.com <mailto:spike at rainier66.com> > wrote:

 

 

> Do you presume they are going to tell you they are really doing?

 

>…They had better because the Navy has to convince Congress to authorize the money…

 

They do tell congress, or rather the subcommittee of congress cleared to know what the Navy is doing.  Not all congress members are cleared or clearable.

 

>…needed to build the damn stupid thing…

 

So you don’t know what the thing is, but you know it is damn and stupid?

 

>…And unfortunately they probably will authorize it for one and only one reason, it has the word "Trump" in its name…

 

But you still don’t know what it is.  Right.

 

> We don’t even know if a missile was involved in the Apache crash. 

 

>…We know a missile was NOT involved. The Apache was brought down by a slow, cheap Iranian Shahed-136 intelligent DRONE that cost about $20,000….

 

Have you advised the Joint Chiefs on this?  Apparently you have knowledge they don’t have.

 

 

 

  

>…Why in the hell would the US military want to ENHANCE the radar cross-section of its warships or planes?! 

 

> They enhance radar cross section to draw fire John.  

 

>…But a battleship is NOT a decoy…

 

Again, you presume knowledge.

 

>…it is a prime, hugely expensive target!!

 

Again you presume knowledge you do not have.

 

>…Spike, your defense of the status quo is just getting silly.  

 

John K Clark

 

John read over what you wrote please.  Now recognize the obvious: you are not briefed on what the Navy is doing.  They didn’t tell us.  They didn’t tell the press.  We don’t know.  Imagine that.  Use some imagination John.  Given an assignment (imagine one) how would you accomplish it?  I can offer this: anything you and I can imagine, the people who do this for a living thought of it thirty years ago.  

 

In most of your posts, you presume knowledge you do not have, starting with your insistent assertion that a battleship is not a decoy and is hugely expensive.  Not necessarily on both.

 

spike

 

 

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20260611/1caab90f/attachment.htm>