Fair point.
Candelestine
joined 2 years ago
tbf, neither of those is an active warzone. DMZ is under an armistice, and Afghanistan was an occupation. In both cases the hot part of the war is over, and peace/pacification is the order of business.
Ah. Well ... that'd do it.
But it still falls under the purview of the Arms Export Control Act. Congress gets oversight over more than just money, if they pass a law that gives them that authority. Which they did back in the 70s.
Not quite.
When we do Foreign Military Financing programs, we give a set amount of money that the other government then pays us back from, buying what they wish. So, Israel pays us for our weapons. Just, with money we gave them. They also buy weapons from us with their own money, we only cover a fairly small percentage of their total defense budget.
The Arms Export Control Act covers the situation regardless.
Part of the point I was trying to make was about how clearly, those two cops did not see things in the same way as we do. They are very clearly behaving as if it was an active warzone, and they are facing a confirmed enemy.
I am more interested in the source of this mentality than I am simply brushing it off as a broader "cops are always whatever".
Yes, and there was a point of nuance I missed as well. I was not attempting to disparage the modern military though, as much as point out the us-vs-them mentality and pursuit of destruction of the enemy as a high priority.
Ah, I see. Thank you.
Every state has uneven distribution. Gerrymandering uses that to give an outsized number of reps to one side and not the other.
Depends entirely on how successful we are in the upcoming election cycles, and at governing the country when our people are in office. It's not a one player game, unless we give up.
Though we should expect attempts at sabotage. Resilience is the name of the game though. Fascist ideology tries to paint us as weak, and we really can't afford to go along with that at any point.