SpaceX rocket launch in about 3:45 hours, they are attempting a landing again
20:43:00 UTC
4:43:00PM Eastern
1:43:00PM Pacific
>CRS-8 will be the first CRS mission to the ISS since the ill-fated CRS-7, and stowed in Dragon's trunk will be BEAM; a small Bigelow inflatable module to be attached to the station. The first stage, provided the barge is go to support a landing, will attempt to land downrange on OCISLY
Streams:
[NASA TV] http://nasatv-lh.akamaihd.net/i/NASA_101@319270/master.m3u8
[SpaceX Technical] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh8V0COrrzE
[SpaceX Full/Hosted] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pUAydjne5M
Mods sticky this
>>7988214
2 hours and 30 minutes.
>>7988214
A lot like Formula One, I only watch SpaceX rocket launches for the crashes.
>>7988214
>Bigelow inflatable module to be attached to the station
Nice. Hope all works well
Allready a thread about this
>>7988384
would you rather have dumb math riddles, IQ threads and /x/ seeking help for dumb shit?
>>7988328
Yeah, seeing Bigelow tech deployed is exciting. ULA and Bigelow have scheduled an announcement for Monday, which I believe will be the launch contract for the first private space station, going up on an Atlas V 552 sometime next year, or the year after.
Maybe they'll also announce a plan to demo the CST-100 by docking with the Bigelow station before docking at the ISS. I'm sure that would make NASA happy, seeing a docking test at someone else's $200-400 million station before doing it at their $150 billion station.
>>7988386
fair point
>>7988214
>SpaceX (Will it blow?)
No, they tested ALL the struts this time around.
Just over 30 minutes until the stream starts
>>7988530
30 min until launch. stream should be starting any time now.
>>7988543
>and here go we
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pUAydjne5M
>>7988530
>30 mins
It's already started faggot. Step up your SpaceX game
HIGH TEST CONFIRMED
>Trying to land of the drone ship
Chances of another landing failure?
FREEEEEEEEEEEEEE MARRKEEEEEEEEEEEEEEETTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
>>7988584
Almost 100% but they will not start mass producing these rockets and re using the older ones.
FUCK YEAH! SCIENCE BITCHES!
WOOOOOOOO
Congrats!
>>7988725
That chick is so fuckable
>>7988725
moon landing when?
>>7989326
ABSOLUTELY BEAUTIFUL FAMILIA
TODAY IS GOOD
>>7989334
1969
>>7989326
Unf.
>coming soon
>>7989409
why Neptune?
>>7989435
Because it's a pun.
russkies on suicide watch
>>7989435
>landing on water
>water planet
I'm just dreaming anyway, some day in the distant future whatever technology developed from this SpaceX rocket maybe could make landing on Neptune's poles possible (1000 km/h winds kek).
>>7989435
> Ice giant
> blue like a huge ocean
> furthest planet of our star system
> barely explored, only a few pictures from Voyager
> Plenty of moons that are still a mystery
NEPTUNE A BEST, GO MUSK!
>>7988214
>No GMT
Fuck you America.
>>7989517
Dude, GMT is UTC.
>>7989508
Is there really anything more to know about the place? It's just gas and ice.
>>7989520
I've never heard of UTC, what does that even stand for?
>>7989522
>hurr durr I know everything even though I don't even know what the term ice giant means
>pretty much came here to laugh at the egg faced yokels who said it would never happen even after the ground landing
>instead find a wasteland
sad
>>7989522
>ice
>not a valuable resource
imho going to Neptune might be needed very soon, though it would really suck if its ice/water were found to be inedible.
>>7989532
Don't you know?
When anything actually cool happens, /sci/ is dead. When someone comes up with a tech that might be useful 20 years from now, it's filled with idiots from /pol/ and /lit/ and /b/ and /x/ and /v/
>>7989532
>>7989544
a lot of people lost interest after the fails and delayed times, though the threads on /g/ are always kinda lively: >>>/g/53935430
>>7989525
Its GMT that doesnt reference Greenwich, for political correctness. Its the new international standard
>>7989560
You need 9400 m/s just to get to LEO, its another 11700 m/s to get to neptune
>nailed the landing on the barge
Jesus, I fucking missed it for the live shit. FUCK!
>When I first started SpaceX I wanted to land a booster in the ocean. Everyone said I was daft to try to land a booster in the ocean, but I built in all the same, just to show them. First time, it crashed into the ocean. So I built a second and third one. They sank into the ocean as well. So I built a fourth. That landed, fell over, then sank into the ocean. But the fifth one stayed up. And that's what you're going to get folks, first stages that land on autonomous barges with weird names in the middle of the ocean.
>>7989754
its a ship not a barge
>>7989754
Reminder that the reason SpaceX has to land in the ocean is outright corruption in the US government.
The two drone ships are called
Just Read the Instructions
and
Of Course I still Love You.
>>7989771
And yet the water landing is more versatile and takes half the fuel. If only all corruption could produce superior results.
>>7989754
that fits far too well
>spending billions of dollars on space when there is still poverty, discrimination, starvation, unemployment on Earth.
>>7989833
>throwing money at those problems will make them go away
lel
>>7989833
>not knowing what asteroid mining is
>>7989833
Guess we are never gonna send anything to space ever again then. Oh well.
Watched it live at work today. Exciting shit.
What's the likelyhood of sticking future landing attempts now that SpaceX has data from a successful land landing, a successful ocean landing, and another near-successful ocean landing? How long until successful landings are just the norm now?
Combine this with how SpaceX is ramping up to a launch every two weeks by the year and... holy fuck. How can that be competed with?
>>7989858
>by the year
*by the end of the year
>>7989858
Next for them is to reuse a rocket they have landed.
what are chances that improving this technology will take us a step closer to space exploration? I wonder if we can achieve that before planet x strikes earth to oblivion.
>>7989876
This is a huge step in reducing the costs of space exploration and stands to open up the barriers of space access to all sorts of groups.
Unsurprisingly, the most expensive part of a rocket launch is the rocket itself. Fuel is relatively cheap. By re landing these rockets the hope is that either parts or the full rocket will be reusable hence reducing future launch costs.
>>7989522
>Is there really anything more to know about the place?
Why the magnetic pole of both Neptune and Uranus are not only very tilted but also offset from their cores.
>>7989869
This
Actually reusing a rocket they have launched, landed and recovered and refurbished, and doing it all significantly cheaper than just building 2 separate lower stages, will be the big hurdle
>>7989522
>It's just gas and ice.
>Daily reminder that a hundred tons o f ice transported to LEO would be worth over $15 billion
>Daily reminder that a reusable Kuck Mosquito could haul that 100 tons of ice in every few years for a potential start up cost of only few hundred million dollars
>>7990031
use a gravity tractor to move an asteroid that is mostly water ice to the L1 Earth Moon Lagrange point. set it up as a fueling station that makes hydrogen and oxygen.
>>7988435
>rocket explodes merely because it tipped over
Um, that should not happen. Engineering oversight and unexcusable safety concern ignored for a vehicle meant to be reusable.
>>7990100
It's a pair of thin, gas pressurized cylinders stacked on top of each other stacked with volatiles. It's a ROCKET. You physically cannot build a launch vehicle that could survive tipping over and do a useful amount of work (going up doesn't count; the real legwork is going sideways) towards putting a payload in orbit.
>>7990158
better seals and valves and something to absorb the shock would help
>>7990185
?
the fuel tanks are still going to fucking break
the things like 150 feet tall
It's not strong
>>7989682
hownew.ru
>>7990031
>Kuck Mosquito
Fuck me, 4chan has ruined me, couldn't stop laughing for a solid 20 seconds.
>>7989771
care to explain?
>>7989754
Kek
>>7989852
What exactly is it, besides the obvious? We don't do it, and have no reason to do it at the moment. Anything that we need can be mined on Earth at a far lower cost. Worrying about some future need for asteroid resources is stupid when we should be worrying about using Earth's resources with more care and more efficiency.
>>7990222
>Anything that we need can be mined on Earth at a far lower cost
The platinum group elements beg to differ. Fuel made from volatiles rich asteroids processed in space makes those extra 11 km/s of delta-V needed to reach Neptune easy.
>>7989786
Someone at SpaceX (probably Musk) has a hard on for Ian Banks.
>>7990224
You also need to be able to not just get there, but mine and process the needed resources. That's a pipe dream, and we shouldn't be concerning ourselves with that at the moment.
>>7989326
So after it lands on the drop ship, what keeps the first stage from falling over due to waves and wind? You'd think a tall, virtually hollow, structure with a very small base would fall over quite easily without supports.
>>7990224
Mining anything in space is a very bad idea.
The only way this will ever change is if we actually have colonies in space to make use of resources mined in space. The operations and transport to space and back to Earth are idiotic from a business perspective and doomed to failure.
>>7990210
He's landing at sea because the rocket went too far to have enough fuel to fly back to the pad
>>7990285
Inflatable heat shields are already in development. These are engineering problems, not physics problems. It's just a matter of time.
>>7990274
>You also need to be able to not just get there, but mine and process the needed resources. That's a pipe dream, and we shouldn't be concerning ourselves with that at the moment.
I couldn't disagree more. Now is the time to push the boundaries of technology, and change the meaning of what is possible, to pull humanity out of the rut it's entering.
>>7990302
>Inflatable heat shields are already in development.
This is irrelevant and won't help make space mining profitable.
>>7990304
Go for it; give me a list of economically unsolvable problems that make space mining doomed to failure.
>>7990309
topkek
>>7990274
The stage is pretty much empty of fuel, so most of the weight is in the heavy ass engines and landing legs and shit on the bottom of the stage. That's what keeps it from tipping over. Really low center of mass.
>>7989326
Sasuga Elon-sama
>>7989833
> a child could've eaten that rocket! C'mon guys, it's the current year
Why doesn't Musk just use parachutes to safe land the empty rocket? I think I might be onto something...
>>7990625
He wants to not smash it into the ground or get it soaked in salt water, parachutes hit too hard and arent accurate
>>7990629
Well isn't a parachute+thruster combination safer, since you can have a much bigger landing target on land compared to that ship?
>>7990633
On land maybe, but its no good for sea, and most of the landings will be at sea
>>7990638
I suppose because the orbit of the first stage collides on sea.
>>7990640
Pretty much, you need a fair bit of fuel to fly all the way back to florida rather than just slightly adjust your ballistic curve
>>7990638
the landings are just at sea for now because it's too dangerous to land them anywhere close to civilization. The ultimate goal is to have a landing facility on dry land similar to a plane runway, Space-X just hasn't gotten their shit together and proved they can safely land on land yet.
>>7990645
They have already flown a lower stage back to the launch pad and recovered it. Sea landing are the ultimate goal because they are much more cost effective for most flights
>>7989326
How are they doing this? Alien technology? Their rocket landings looks eerily similar to the Lonnie Zamorra UFO incident.
>>7990700
What are you on about? Its just a guided rocket
>>7990701
I think he is blinded by the beauty of that landing.
>>7989676
The British Empire has been gone for just 19 years and already SJWs are spitting on our standards. Renaming for political correctness is as dumb as when they renamed AD and BC to CE and BCE. Same fucking thing just less offended fedoras.
>>7990018
They will never do it, rocket blasts stress out the parts too much.
>>7990031
> cuck mosquito
Since the other SpaceX tread has maxed out and is going away, I figure i might ask here instead.
In the "muh 27 engines"-tread came up. What is the definition of a rocket engine?
As far as i can tell, there is no textbook definition, so all I've got to go by is what the manufacturers label it them self.
Examples:
The RD-107/8 , is referred to as 1 engine, though with 4 or more combustion chamber.
As far as i can work out, its more along the lines of turbopumps/thrust structure, as in "one set of turbopumps with x combustion chambers=1 rocket engine".
Or would SpaceX putting 9 Merlins with 9 turbopumps on the same thrust-structure and call in Merlin Octa-engine be correct?
All of this is completely arbitrary, but if anyone has any input then please share
>>7990880
lol kys my man
>>7990880
definition of 1(one) rocket engine
Jesus fuck its only when you press "post" that you get to see how shitty a sentence structure you can create.
>>7989876
unf
>saved to porn folder
>>7989876
>>7989966
I want to see 1 rocket, lift off from earth land on mars, drop off a payload, take off, and land on earth again, all without refueling or interaction with dropaway boosters. A completely antonymous rocket.
Well, preferably, doing this between a lunar colony and a martian colony with payloads going in both directions. I'd even take 1 rocket delivering multiple payloads to multiple celestial bodies on one flight, where it lands on the celestial bodies and takes off for the next waypoint.
I know that in most part is not very efficient and a bit crazy, but I'd like there to exist the technology to do this sort of thing. We may need it for something in the future, who fucking knows. Like sending such technology to the next star system or something (better done with multiple rockets and/or one big rocket with many smaller ones on board to split off at the destination.)
>>7990757
NASA claimed the Space Shuttle could fly every month.
>>7990302
>I couldn't disagree more. Now is the time to push the boundaries of technology, and change the meaning of what is possible, to pull humanity out of the rut it's entering.
Couldn't agree more. If we wait for the perfect moment to start mining, colonizing, etc the moment will never come and humanity will never be a multi-planetary species. The future is determined those who forge it, not to those who waste their energy trying to find every reason to NOT do something.
Yes, the first set of attempts will suck. They'll be wildly unprofitable and we'll probably blow up several crafts and lose many lives, but eventually we won't suck and we'll have gained our entire solar system and a destiny for humanity that isn't hopelessly tethered to that of Earth. That's how we've always made significant progress as a species and I don't see that changing any time soon.
>>7990746
>>7991172
NASA'a Shuttle was subject to atmospheric re-entry and therefore had to deal with much higher temperatures and stresses than SpaceX's first stage rockets.
It is true that the high temperatures reached during launch will affect the materials, but there are plenty of high-tech materials with high temperature stability.
For example, nickel-based superalloys with thermal barrier coatings and intricately machined cooling air channels can be used in gas-turbine engines operating at temperatures above the melting point of nickel.
As a materialsfag I am excited by the challenge of relaunching used rockets
>>7990994
There's no reason a rocket would need to complete a full landing to drop off cargo unless that cargo included humans.
>>7991238
>For example, nickel-based superalloys with thermal barrier coatings and intricately machined cooling air channels can be used in gas-turbine engines operating at temperatures above the melting point of nickel.
Saved to file for fapping to later
>>7991254
>unless
Too many reasons really. There's many ways to do everything, I just want that 1 specific way to do it. Why? Because we can. It opens up doors for better technology, more experience, and more mission types.
>>7991172
>NASA claimed the Space Shuttle could fly every month.
They didn't claim that a landed Space Shuttle was ready to fly again after a month, they made that sort of claim years in advance of ever launching.
NASA ordered 4 shuttles. They were all in varying states of completion before the first launch. That was supposed to be the whole program: build four vehicles, have them work right the first time, untested, all new clean-sheet hardware designs, no prior flight experience, never have anything go wrong or need to change anything, use them for over a hundred flights each, end the program after ten years.
Naturally, when they got the first one back, it was in no condition to be reused. It had to be taken right apart and rebuilt.
>be me
>be murrican
The freedom train has no brakes
>>7990185
It is cheaper to make the landing more reliable than to make the tanks more resistant, because that would increase the weight, so you'd need more fuel, bigger tank, etc. Also that shit is 70 meters tall, so even if did not explode from tipping over, it would still be damaged beyond repair.
>>7991819
I could be wrong but doesn't getting good at landing also eventually open doors for other craft shapes? E.g. for crafts that will be spacefaring most of the time but will occasionally land and would be better off with a design different from your typical rocket setup, like planetary transports.
>>7991847
Well idk but there is no reason to strengthen the tanks with the current design.
>>7991736
>South African guy
>Russian technology
>Murrican
>>7992192
American company
>>7992198
He's just taking advantage of American government money. He's cucking you.
>>7991172
Yes, and then they tried to to di and found it didnt work that well. Spacex says they actually did it, fully refurbished the rocket and had it ready to fly in 2 weeks. Still have to wait for them to actually launch a refurbished rocket but still
>>7992215
>cucking a nation
It is for all man kind. I don't care who is doing it.
>>7992215
I'll happily give my tax bucks to SpaceX or any other company that's actively improving space travel in one way or another instead of sitting on their asses and killing projects and spewing excuses. It's far FAR better spent there than on the military or oil subsidies or any of the countless useless things the government pours billions upon billions into.
>>7992237
military is literally the only legitimate purpose of government
how can you bring up military and "oil subsidies" that don't exist, while fucking trillions are dumped into useless welfare programs
>>7992215
>>7992192
That's the thing about america that most people don't get. You don't have to be born here to be american. You're american when you hold up to our ideals, our virtues, and everything else that makes us exceptional. Musk is american as fuck, and he knows it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elon_Musk#Nationalism
>>7992269
>According to Musk, the United States is "[inarguably] the greatest country that has ever existed on Earth", describing it as "the greatest force for good of any country that's ever been".
Holy shit.
>>7992269
So he's a fucking retard
And he's a dumbass open borders liberal
Your nation is your people, he is not in any way a "nationalism", because american is not a people, nor is america a nation.
>>7992297
That 5km partition of grassland isn't a nation either, silly European!
>>7992269
Oh is that why America is so accepting of immigrants? Oh wait..
>>7992303
Your idol
>"Musk believes outright that there "would not be democracy in the world if not for the United States", arguing there were "three separate occasions in the 20th-century where democracy would have fallen with World War I, World War II and the Cold War, if not for the United States"."
Profoundly and exceptionally stupid
He supports a carbon tax, and is anti-trump
Perhaps he's doing good work with SpaceX and electric cars but jesus christ he's a faggot
>>7992269
All of your virtues are are inherited from other countries, stolen from indigenous people or ripped off by enslaving people lol.
It's so incredibly ironic to hear musk, a guy who had to flee his home country because of the USA ruining it, talk about the US as some "force for good"
Or that democracy is good, when he's from fucking south africa
>>7992311
what the fuck is that supposed to mean? idiot
>>7992297
No, asshole.
Your nation is your people. Our people are those who share our values and ideals. You might be xenophobic and hung up on a foreigner being part of your own country, but a real american isn't.
>abloo bloo you don't like illegal immigrants
Nobody fucking does. Show me one country that wouldn't deport people if they started hopping a border instead of going through proper legal channels.
>>7992318
Call me when your other countries land on the moon six times.
>>7992315
>He supports a carbon tax, and is anti-trump
Those both sound positive to me. Fossil fuels endanger lives (I've seen casualties of the coal industry first hand) and poison the air, even if you don't buy global warming, and trump is the biggest flaming idiot bag of hot air this planet has ever seen.
>>7992268
Because we still haven't demobilized our military since WWII. The US had an isolationist policy since its founding until WWI.
"The US does not go abroad for foreign monsters to slay"
>>7992326
>Or that democracy is good, when he's from fucking south africa
>A man's worth and beliefs are to be defined not by how he lives, but where he's born.
Nice. You sure owned us americans.
>>7992326
It means you only like immigrants when they are white regardless of how hard they work for your country.
> had to flee his home country because of the USA ruining it,
Oh so you believe in apartheid too, yep confirned /pol/ stormweenie asshole.
>>7992353
Umm wasn't the Apartheid bad or something?
I only know about it from District 9
>>7992359
I'm biting.
Fuck off and never post here again.
>>7992359
It was bad, but what they have now is worse. Life isnt a fairytale
>>7992335
What values and ideals are you talking about.
The majority of America is 100% a-ok with illegals, so how can you claim that they are part of your people despite the fact they disagree with your values?
This sort of "civic nationalism" is a marxist fantasy, it's a delusion, it doesn't exist, no non-white believes in it, nor do the vast majority of whites, nor did the founding fathers despite their rhetoric.
It's like some SJW on the television telling a black person we're all the same, and that black telling them "hell no, cracker".
Race, genetics, ancestry & religion is who you are
Not meaningless values/ideals that can & do change constantly.
>>7992359
Apartheid was only a lack of universal suffrage
The west however was very much against the idea of whites having a country in africa, as they are marxists
Just as today they are against the idea of whites having a country anywhere.
This is why no liberal ever bats an eye at the thought/fact of rampant organized violence against whites, or ethnic cleansing of whites.
These people would gladly let themselves to be killed to prove they aren't "racist", its a sick mindset.
>>7992374
Fuck off. Your race, genetics, religion - they don't and shouldn't define how you act and how you choose to change the world. Who you are is what you do, and your values - your ideals - that's what you act upon. They're what make you who you are.
If you let yourself be guided by what others say you should believe because you want to be a good german or a good muslim, then you're nothing better than a sheep following others. You're squandering what you could be because you think standing up for something you believe in is worthless. It's disgusting.
>>7992392
>Apartheid was only a lack of universal suffrage
Apartheid was mainly a system of racial segregation, like in the pre-civil-rights-movement American South.
>>7992392
I can't be bothered to argue with you that white rule in a overwhelmingly black country was morally wrong but hopefully you are at least clever enough to understand that it was stupid because it was totally unsustainable. We all want "Europe for Europeans" so why the fuck don't we practice what we preach and stay the fuck out of Africa? Africa is for blacks and they can stay there, we have no business there.
>>7992398
Yea the children totally have nothing to do with their parents, right? No relation there!
>and your values - your ideals
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN? How can you base your identity & nationality on something MEANINGLESS?
>then you're nothing better than a sheep
You advocate an ideology that literally compels forfeiting your country since it's considered racist/bigotted to defend it, and you call ME a sheep?
>You're squandering what you could be because you think standing up for something you believe in is worthless.
You want to squander the entire fucking country, your race, your genetics, your religion, thousands of years of heritage, all because you think you are completely seperated from history or the people around you or those who went before you.
It is you who are the sheep, you have been brainwashed into some sort of sick liberal ideology that NOONE ELSE BELIEVES IN, and you lack the critical thinking skills to see the obvious flaws.
>>7992406
Right away, you have a flaw, it was a white country. Blacks had their own countries/tribal areas inside South Africa, where they ruled themselves.
>was morally wrong
White rule over blacks is morally wrong, but black rule over whites is fucking great? Whites still live in south africa, though millions of them have fled like Musk.
>We all want "Europe for Europeans"
Clearly you do not, otherwise you wouldn't be talking about how "immoral" it was for whites to exist in countries they founded & built.
South Africa would have been completely sustainable if the countries in the west weren't run by marxists that threatened war on them.
It's not about "morals", noone cares about "morals", nor do people agree on what is moral or not, it comes down to simple pro-white vs anti-white.
>>7992441
By your retard logic the USA is a British country because the guys who set it up have sole rights to it right even if they are asshole totalitarians who cared little for the welfare of it's local citizens? The entire fucking point of a government is to represent the people, how can a white government represent a majority black country?
>>7992459
The were hardly asshole totalitarians, but otherwise your point is fine
>>7992428
What the fuck is wrong with you? Have you never heard of self determination?
Values and ideals are the complete opposite of meaningless, by definition. They're the ideas you VALUE and feel are worth protecting and taking action for.
I value the idea of freedom in expressing my words and my beliefs as highly as I can. I would die for it. If the country I lived in didn't share these ideals I would fight them too.
Following anything because "you're supposed to" and "it's tradition" is the most narrowminded spiel I've ever heard. No great leader or architect of empires has ever done it because of tradition. They did great things because they rose above them and established something new. They chose not to follow the past. I'm not the one who's completely separated from history, here.
And you're right. I will squander an entire country - I'll squander my race, my religion, and my entire upbringing if I feel like they're wrong - and you know what? Anyone who doesn't do this is a coward. You're a coward if you blindly follow something because you've been told to even if you know it's wrong. I can't fathom sitting down and thinking it's okay because 'my country says'. It's ridiculous. You're supposed to think for yourself.
Most people don't think this way, you're right. Most people are content sitting in mediocrity with the same structure, or bending down to things even if they find them wrong. That's the difference between an american ideology and everyone else. You think it's natural to obey.
We don't.
>>7992459
Never heard the term "WASP" before? Are you an idiot? The people in the US founded the USA
>The entire fucking point of a government is to represent the people,
Yes, the people who founded and built it and run it. aka whites.
Again, you've skipped the fact that blacks ruled themselves in south africa.
Is this how your professor told you to debate, ignore anything that contradicts your point?
>>7992465
Someone agreeing with me on 4chan? The planets have aligned!
>>7992468
Nice narcissistic rant, autist
Funny how you confuse your own delusional worldview with what it means to be "american"
And everyone who disagrees is a sheep
One day you'll finish high school.
>>7992475
Most of the people were black you muppet. Who set up the country doesn't matter. Or else you end up with preposterous scenarios where the entire Middle east are white countries because guess who drew the borders of Iraq, Jordan etc?
>>7992485
>Self determination and following what you believe to be right isn't american.
Alright buddy. Don't you have a communism subreddit to get back to?
> you will never be a comfy short shorts operator in Rhodesia
>>7992490
They lost the war
Whites BTFO
>>7992489
>posting captain america
gj proving my point. Kinda ironic that Captain america made his name invading Germany and telling them what they are supposed to believe.
>Claims to support freedom
>Calls anyone who disagrees with his insane beliefs a sheep
Grow up
>>7992486
There were no blacks in SA when whites landed & colonized it.
The middle east predated western imperialism.
Nor did the west draw the boundaries of these countries anyways, if anyone did it was the ottomans, or the various empires before them.
