>>6295583

So, something about this tweet….

Back in 2012, it was the USS Firebolt which towed the USS Porter into port following a collision with a tanker:

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/theerant/some-details-of-uss-porter-ddg-78-collision-with-o-t52212.html

The ship itself was nearly cleaved in half. The report released by the Navy, publicly, does not quite match crew accounts. It was hit during the night and the bridge crew stated that it was the actions of the captain which saved the ship. The captain cut into the incoming tanker and made what would have been a nearly perfect perpendicular bisection of the keel into merely an intersection with a much more shallow angle.

The result was numerous fires aboard the higher decks and the lower decks flooded due to the bulbous bow of the tanker punching through at least one compartment. Blackwater systems were completely compromised and flooded most of the other compartments.

The wikipedia article claiming a $700K repair cost can't be accurate, or is only because of some very creative and selective accounting. She was in port for roughly two months. This was one of the first events in a series of unusual collisions between NATO ships and oil tankers.

https://www.breitbart.com/asia/2018/10/04/report-chinese-military-used-hardware-hack-for-massive-penetration-of-u-s-computers/

I was not part of the investigation, and I am probably pushing a bit of my luck regarding discussing events I was involved with, but there was a pretty tight lid thrown down over this. The bridge crew from that night was berthed separately from ship's company, to my knowledge, for their entire stay with MSRON/CRS 11 (they consolidated Riverine and Expeditionary Security to CORIVRON during the deployment - made for some fun days). While it is standard to preserve integrity of testimony - there was a certain spoopiness about all of it that pointed at something being very unusual about the collision.

Obviously, the military would be rather hush-hush about potential gaps in its system design or flaws which could be used to ram a tanker down our throats. There are also policies in place to prevent unnecessarily informing the enemy of the degree of success/failure their attack had.

Huawei is in the news a lot, lately. So has some news about Hillary's servers. Wouldn't it be something if our enemies were knowingly given domain over our military systems and opportunities to test weapons on our military?

People ask why I opted not to re-enlist after thus and became rather … Bitter. Before I was filling a warm body billet in an expeditionary squad, I was an AT (I level). My first thoughts led me to the navigational systems and how it was the peak of absurdity for a whole bridge crew to get rammed by a tanker. From the front. Shipping lanes are like virtual roads and there are lanes. What happened, effectively, is a tanker came in going the wrong way down a lane and coincidentally rammed a U.S. Navy destroyer.

Considering it was obvious Obama was funding the people we were there to shoot and get shot at by… I considered my oath of service and the concept of following orders to be a conflict of interest. Only place we needed to be invading was DC. At least until we got that mess sorted out so we could tell who wasn't some kind of proxy force we were playing whack-a-mole with.

>>6296746

I have some guesses as to who runs ebot. In either event, we have a history. This doesn't mean ebot is good… Or bad. It also means that its role here suits the family which has it deployed.

Families don't necessarily like risk. Kakegurui. All the families and high rollers pretend to be big and bad - like they have earned their position through risk and payoff, but they've stacked the game specifically because their role and position is against risk and gambles.

So, Trump rolls through like Yumeko and now everyone gets to experience the thrill of gambling like the rest of us. Well, kind of. We aren't exactly gambling, but many of the various powers that be see this as a gamble on who is or isn't the winning horse in what is to come.

>>6296864

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kakegurui_%E2%80%93_Compulsive_Gambler

Comes highly recommended. The first chapter or two is a bit cliche… But then it all gets so, so much better.

The Japanese, for reasons I have yet to fully understand, just seem to be based as hell. Perhaps it is that their family lines are older and more prominent in society, so they naturally present the world as being run by families.

In either case, this one struck a personal chord with the masked character.

>>6296928

. . . How could 8ch force a shill to identify itself?

Though I suppose if you are asking if this board is being run by the military, could they somehow force a known person or group to post under a set ID… Then, yes, I suppose that is within the realm of possibility. But if you are going to do that, why not lie?

There again, why haven't other shills taken up Ebot's name and tried to disrupt whatever it is doing? One would think that if it was doing something where the name mattered, you could "jam" that process by copying its name and posting under it.

Things I don't really know. Surely, there is a point behind it namefagging. That point could just be that the operators want to identify who is on shift and to be known as "just a bot." In short - teach people to ignore ebot so that they miss when it does say important things.

Problem is that this is heavily influenced by confirmation bias and disinformation. Ebot is going to say something that seems relevant in its string of statements to different people at different times, confirming their bias.

It's something that will likely be better to investigate after we have more facts at our disposal and can mine the archives for ebot posts if we so feel inclined. I am not sure it is a fruitful endeavor, but I am the extremely curious sort who can appreciate entertaining the outwardly absurd.