steruY
steruY t1_j68m7w7 wrote
Reply to comment by greatvaluemeeseeks in ELI5: What is the difference between turbojet, ramjet, and scramjet? by Global_Maize_8944
What's an afterburner?
steruY t1_j66v7vi wrote
Reply to comment by provocative_bear in ELI5: How is donating equipment to participate in war, not considered going to war? by lloyd705
The options are either war is won or Putin loses power. And he doesn't want to lose power, believe me. That was my concern.
steruY t1_j6416b7 wrote
Reply to comment by alexmin93 in ELI5: How is donating equipment to participate in war, not considered going to war? by lloyd705
>all or even majority of russian nukes
...which means a wipeout of dozens of millions of people still. No need for nukes to be dropped ether way.
steruY t1_j63t9qa wrote
Reply to comment by alexmin93 in ELI5: How is donating equipment to participate in war, not considered going to war? by lloyd705
Well, that's not exactly the means of defense we're talking about. But ok, anyway, I stopped worrying
steruY t1_j63q1e7 wrote
Reply to comment by alexmin93 in ELI5: How is donating equipment to participate in war, not considered going to war? by lloyd705
Russia harmed most of its allies by withdrawing troops from the areas it used to protect, by sanctions, by its migrant policy, etc.
Even if it loses, plenty of countries are taking a noticeable toll as well.
steruY t1_j63pts9 wrote
Reply to comment by alexmin93 in ELI5: How is donating equipment to participate in war, not considered going to war? by lloyd705
If you're naive enough to believe none of thousands of nukes in Putin's hands work, then you're really leaving in a bubble. "A better alternative" doesn't matter as a single nuke detonating is already millions of deaths.
steruY t1_j639hjz wrote
Reply to comment by Belzeturtle in ELI5: How is donating equipment to participate in war, not considered going to war? by lloyd705
Thanks, hope in humanity restored
steruY t1_j635p7p wrote
Reply to comment by WasabiSunshine in ELI5: How is donating equipment to participate in war, not considered going to war? by lloyd705
"Зачем нам мир без России?" - "Why do we need the world without Russia?" - a phrase commonly told by putin. A dictator who loses a self created war, loses power, and is desperate, is something to be feared. Russia doesn't want nuclear war, but nobody can say so about its leader.
Maybe I'm just panicking, but there no need to keep the guard down.
steruY t1_j632347 wrote
Reply to comment by Dependent-Law7316 in ELI5: How is donating equipment to participate in war, not considered going to war? by lloyd705
>no one wants to be the one to officially start world war 3
Let's hope so, after Russia started the invasion there is plenty of reasons to worry.
steruY t1_j2densm wrote
Reply to comment by AightlmmaHead0ut in Eli5: Why when you yawn your hearing goes down? by Big_carrot_69
Rule 3443: There is a sub for everything
steruY t1_j1u9epd wrote
Reply to ELI5: Why Napoleon was unstoppable and literally destroyed all countries? by Wild-Discount-1990
His tactics were quite innovative for the time:
- Talented usage of artillery and cavalry
- Surprise attacks
- Quick movement of his armies across land, often ignoring supply lines and using local resources
- Extremely high morale of his army - Napoleon knew how to make soldiers loyal and inspire them
He also gained huge support of civil population in France, meaning that he got his back covered throughout the wars.
steruY t1_j6bjpxl wrote
Reply to ELI5: how did we standardize on watts/amps/volts when everything else is segmented across the world (km/miles, nm/ft-lb etc)? by t0r3n0
Just like we standardized on kms, nms, etc. Only few countries in the world are using miles, and only conventionally - even US scientists rely on metric system.
The whole metric system is based on constants like kilogram, meter, second, etc. That conveniently correlate with each other and are used almost universally - first they were defined by well-preserved objects (e.g. 1kg steel block), now we define them using physics.