MovieChat Forums > Ranb > Replies
Ranb's Replies
The book is not going to be one that everyone likes. I would venture to guess that if a person liked the film, they are less likely to enjoy the book.
Duncan Idaho did not last long in the book. In fact his departure is rather sudden after he rescues Paul and Jessica.
That is not true. Operation Warp speed was first publicized on April 29, 2020. Research into mRNA vaccines has be going on since the 1990's. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Warp_Speed
Actual companies/scientists were responsible for developing the vaccines. Pfizer was not funded by Warp Speed but some others were.
In October 2020, the Trump Administration predicted a hundred million available doses by the end of the year; later reduced to twenty million doses. As of January 6, 2021, the CDC was reporting 17 million doses distributed, but only 5 million actually administered to a person.
If this happened up any other president, I think the 100 million dose goal might have been met.
The Apollo program was not much good for anything else than landing men on the moon. Other than Skylab, it got no other use. Since the Russians did not successfully launch their first heavy boost rocket until 1987, the race was rather one sided. But then hindsight is 20-20.
I think if the USA had not spent so much racing to the moon and wasted so much time/money/lives in Vietnam, our space program would be much better today.
I know that lots of real events are depicted in the series, some changed, others not; such as John Lennon living to the present day, an early end to the Vietnam War and Pope John Paul II dying.
Reagan does get treated with kid gloves in this series.
The Russians rushed Sputnik into orbit to prove how superior they were. JFK wanted a way to toot the American horn by landing on men on the moon first; not really for all mankind.
In the end it is just an interesting alternate history.
Jessup sacrificed his own men and his integrity to get where he was. But I'm sure it pissed him right off that a Ltjg weasel like Kaffee brought him down. :)
You should stop playing stupid then.
The citizen or US residential status of Marta was never positively established. Various family members said she was from various countries, they could not agree on one at all. The Nazi-child said she was an "anchor baby"; in other words a US citizen.
If Marta was born in the USA, then her immigration status is not an issue any more than any of US citizen's is. Marta's mom was still illegal, or so Harlon claims. This does not change Marta's status at all.
Is the pro-immigration propaganda the obtuse family thinking Marta is from various countries or claiming she is an immigrant?
I think you vastly overestimate the liability of claiming certain awards and service without trying to obtain benefits related to service.
As far as I know, the only people who steal valor and get punished for it are those who use it to obtain veteran benefits and employment.
Oswald hit JFK two out of three times. That Oswald intentionally aimed for his head is something no one can prove.
I'm not claiming that Hathcock was a fraud. In fact I admire him and have read as much about him as I can. I think Roberts is insulting Hathcock by claiming he said he could not hit a large target at close range.
So you knew Oswald so well that you have determined that he was not a decent shot left handed?
I'm right handed, but shoot just as well left handed. It is not the big deal that you make it out to be.
As the shot was not a difficult one to make, I see no reason why doing it left handed would make it unlikely that Oswald could hit his target.
I think Roberts' assessment of Dealey plaza as laid out in his book "Kill Zone" is nuts. When your assessment of me consists largely of personal insults, it is irrelevant for the most part.
We both agree that the Stolen Valor Act prohibits claiming unearned medals. Why are you complaining?
JFK was also shot in the back. the human torso is much larger than the head.
You think Oswald could not shoot left handed?
All I see you doing is making a ton of BS excuses as to why a person can't hit a large target at short range.
Oswald missed once when shooting at JFK and missed once when shooting at Walker. So?
A fact is not a fact just because you claimed it is. Actually bring evidence into your conversation works much better than unsupported claims.
Tony Mendez (half Mexican, half European) reportedly (according to IMDB) did not have a problem with Affleck portraying him.
The guard called the number of the production company the "Canadians" claimed to work for. It was that simple.
Did not actually happen of course. Other than the fact that some Americans hide out in the residence of the Canadian ambassador and the CIA sent an agent into help get them out, most of the film was a work of fiction with most of the scenes shown not really happening in real life.
If the whole film was a lie, then this means you don't believe that bin Laden was killed by the US military?
Ventura is an attention whore. He was probably libeled in Kyle's book, but I have zero sympathy for anyone like him who promotes wacky conspiracy theories for money.
Enemy at the Gate is a film based upon a book that was in turn based upon an urban myth. While Vasily Zaytsev was a real Soviet sniper, Konig was never proven to exist.
That law (Stolen Valor Act) prohibits claiming that a person has various awards, not that they were in the military or served as a sniper.
So what is your definition of long range and large target? You would be the only person that I have heard of who claimed 88 yards is long range and a human is a small target for a sniper.
Setting the bar at six feet and barn door size is foolish.
I'm still not convinced that Hathcock made the claims that Roberts says he did. I think there is no way an accomplished sniper like Hathcock would say the Dealey Plaza shooting was too hard for him.
Seeing that Hathcock contributed to one of Roberts books is enough to convince me that he knew of him.
Well, their is only one man to be protected from and seeing as how various factions in the comics were trying to kill or use them for their own purposes, he never was a threat to anyone.
There are women in most nuclear power plants, some airliners and other industries in the world, so few meltdowns or other problems like this need to happen.
If you read the comic then you will see the full range of good and bad behavior by the female cast of characters. All the way from do-gooders to psycho killing monsters.
Your loss.
I don't see Roberts' own claim of being a sniper to be sufficient even if it is written on his publisher's website. How about something more official from the Marine Corps?.
Roberts is safe from prosecution per the Stolen Valor Act even if he claims to have been a sniper. The word sniper is a general term and not on covered by federal law. Claiming to be have awarded various medals is not illegal; he does not say which ones he was awarded and he is not, as far as I know, using stolen valor to obtain money.
You can read the actual bill here; https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/258
So far, all of your reasons for a trained marksman being unable to hit a large target at short range, amount to nothing.
You act as though Roberts' books are something more than BS and that anyone would believe a thing he writes in them.
Nothing is clear in the photo you linked to, especially Hathcock's face.
I would have no problem believing that Hathcock was completely unaware of the claims Roberts makes about him in his book. I think you attach far too much importance to what Roberts claims in his book. But good luck with that.
Your photo is more convincing than your unsupported claim, but is it possible for you to supply one that is not so low resolution? I've seen pictures of Carlos Hathcock before; I'm not convinced that this is him standing next to Roberts.
Where is this public record supporting the claim that Roberts was a sniper in Vietnam?
So your opinion is that a Marine that only qualifies at the marksman level is a poor shooter? Does the Marine Corps feel the same way you do?
Yes, I understand that the path a bullet takes is affected by the adjustment of the sights or scope. But both of your examples show that a bullet at that range will still hit a large target like a man's torso at short range.
I check your results with JBM ballistics and they agree. But being 3 to 4 inches high at 85 yards with a 200 yard zero still means a hit when aiming for center mass.
Positioning a rifle barrel out of a window and pointing it 45 degrees is not hard, I don't see why this is a factor at all when the range is so short and the target so large. Have you never done any practical shooting at a rifle range? I have, it's not that hard.
Yes, Barnes was very bad. He murdered woman who had harsh words for him. Then he murdered Elias to keep him from testifying against him about it.