An 'ideal' condition is what is defined in those testing protocols that are required (by FTC?) for mileage testing. That's not the same as optimal-for-mileage-estimate, but it is certainly an ideal situation.
Any conforms-to-this-model scenario is 'ideal', even if it isn't a best-case.
Can someone translate this for me? I'm not even sure what language it is in. Google is no help at all.
It strikes me as perfectly intelligible English. It does play with the contrast between "ideal" conditions and "optimal-for-mileage" which is a different ideal.
You may need to work on your English language skills.
Yup Bozo, you have advocated NUKING AND FIREBOMBING YOUR OWN COUNTRY.
That is what you believe, but it isn't what I said, which you clearly didn't understand correctly. I have tried to explain the sloppy thinking on your part that has lead you to make these claims, but you are much too happy with your fatuous sound bite to pay any attention to the actual message.
You SURE AS HELL DID, BOZO!
You have told us that repeatedly. It doesn't make it true - and it isn't. You can't understand why it isn't true, but that's your problem - and it's not a trivial problem. Senile dementia is a serious and irreversible disorder, and you clearly gone a long way down that path..
You have told us that repeatedly. It doesn't make it true - and it isn't. You can't understand why it isn't true, but that's your problem - and it's not a trivial problem. Senile dementia is a serious and irreversible disorder, and you have clearly gone a long way down that path..
Hey Bozo, you JUST ADMITTED to NUKING YOUR OWN COUNTRY! Now, you want to qualify it that you just want to NUKE PART OF YOUR COUNTRY.
Bozo's Sewage Sweeper
Actually a specific part that was about to cease being part of my own country. One of those trivial distinctions that you find it convenient to ignore, or would if you had enough sense to recognise them.
Hey Bozo, this is called a DISTINCTION without a DIFFERENCE, but you won't understand what that means.
Bozo's Sewage Sweeper
I do, but you don't, either because you want to ignore it, or because you are too stupid to realise it exists.
Losing part of one's own country to an invader makes a real difference, big enough that it would be worth using up a nuclear weapon to stop them exploiting it, but you can't see that, which makes you remarkably stupid.
Hey Bozo, the bottom line is that you think NUKING YOUR OWN COUNTRY is a good idea, end of story. And it is all because OZ does not have the military strength to repel a CHICOM invasion w/o bringing in the US to do it for you.
Bozo's Sewage Sweeper
Nuclear a small and valuable part of it that an invader was about to take over probably is a good idea. Showing that you are willing to do it is an even better idea, because it might discourage the invader.
It's by no means certain that even the US could repel a CHICOM military invasion - they'd probably have to nuke to quite a bit of their own country just to bring it to a standstill. China has four times the population of the US, and it's GDP - $16 trillion in 2023 versus the US $20 trillion - is catching up fast.
There you go AGAIN, Bozo - claiming that NUKING YOUR OWN COUNTRY is a GOOD IDEA! You just can't help yourself, can you? Of course, the answer is NO, nuking your own, or any other country, is a BAD IDEA! PERIOD. END OF STORY.
What we do know is that OZ would be overwhelmed by the CHICOMs. The US definitely could repel such an invasion, but explaining the details to an idiot such as yourself is a COMPLETE WASTE OF TIME.
Bozo's Sewage Sweeper
That's your idea of the "bottom line" . You are talking out of your bottom, as usual.
Not exactly. The US had reservations about developing nuclear weapons, but managed to over-come them, and maintain a stockpile of nuclear weapons to this day. Using them would be a bad idea, but not having them seems to be a worse one. You do seem to be coming across as a fan of complete nuclear disarmament.
They might be. There's a lot of water between them and us.
Your attempts at such an explanation would be a complete waste of time - you don't have a clue. and you are too dim to realise quite how clueless you are.
The usual point is that every country is always well equipped to repel the last attempted invasion, but the Chinese are unlikely to try to emulate Pancho Villa
Hey Bozo, since you don't know shit about that topic why don't you either:
Sewage Sweeper knows a great deal about bovine excreta and post a lot of it here. He might follow his own advice, but he'd have to know what he was doing, and he doesn't seem to be aware of that.
Hey Bozo, I didn't think you had the intellect in addressing the topic, so no surprise there.
BTW, you couldn't even spell Sydney, you IDIOT!!!!
Bozo's Sewage Sweeper
Interesting sentence. I wonder if Sewage Sweeper can work out the preposition he should have used instead of "in". It's going to be an error of action, so the question how he changed the sentence in midstream to end up with the wrong preposition. He may have started off with "I didn't think you had any interest in addressing the topic", then tried for a more insulting variation.
<snipped the usual reference to a less interesting error of action - typo.>ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.