homura1650

I don't think he is forgetting. This is about purging the military of people who would not be loyal to him.

You don't make peace with your friends. You make peace with your enemies.

Unless you actually plan on commiting a full scale and thorough genocide, eliminating terrorists is simply not a viable strategy for defeating terrorism. If you don't go all the way to genocide, then a sizable portion of the non-terrorists you didn't kill will become terrorist

Can't die of overdose if the state kills you first.

So. The secretary of defense is not an elected position. Most people in the country don't even know who currently holds the role.

The opinion of those he leads and works with is much more important.

Leaders say a lot of things. Even without nukes, Israel has enough conventional military might to have a significant detergent effect (and to defend against attacks that actually do happen).

Further, the politics in the middle east has not been Arabs vs Israel for decades. Israel is a well positioned member of the anti Iran coalition.

That hasn't been the case for decades. Israel has a lot of allies in the region (basically the entire anti-Iran coalition). Admitadly, these alliances are largely premised on Israel's military and intelligence might, which would be diminished without US support; but Israel still has significant in-house capabilities.

As to the actual power dynamics, I agree that the US has a lot of leverage. But that is meaningless if they don't use it. Moreso now that Israel knows they would only need to wait for the next administration to reverse course if we started using our leverage now.

American's were used to living in a low inflation environment. Argentinians have been living in a high inflation environment for decades.

In what way is Argentina inconsistent with MMT?

Israel is not alone in the region anymore. The middle east is bipolar now, and Israel is well established in the anti-Iran coalition. I wouldn't call this "stabilizing", but if the actual fighting is contained to Israel, Iran, and Iranian proxies, that is good for the rest of the anti-Iran coalition.

Sucks for Israel, but when your political leadership is fighting with military leadership because the latter is not sufficiently hawkish, I don't think "stability" is the policy objective said leadership is actually pursuing.

Years ago, my employer had a timecard computer that people would remote desktop into to fill out there timecard every day, since the software wouldn't run on modern windows (I think we were up to windows 10 at the time. One day, the old the old server finally died. For a while we emailed our hours until we found a solution. That solution ended up being a Fedora VM running the payroll software under Wine.

Both can be true. A large swath of the electorate is stupid for electing Trump, but the Democratic party failed to reach them. This is a lesson that Republicans have known for decades but Democrats still don't get. Voter's are not rational; being better than your opponent does not win elections. People can be annoyed at the voters for making this reality, and at the Democrats for still not getting it.

In fairness to the Dems though, the incumbent party lost ground in almost every Democracy, and Harris underperformed less in swing states where both parties campaigned.