CarmineCatboy

Nevermind that, you can't just pretend that a strike happened in your territory so the US saves an indeterminate amount of face. That's just not a thing even a client state can do and it's really funny that anyone in the admn may have thought otherwise.

US drones, like everything else, are good for counter-insurgency. It's like the Bayraktars. They aren't bad at what they do. They do a lot of damage to the PKK, the insurgencies in Ethiopia and, as it turns out, the Armenian Armed Forces. Iran's Shaheds are just the reverse, they are tools for asymmetrical warfare. So you see that sort of weapon in the Ukraine War on both sides, and with Yemen's sanctions enforcement operation.

The problem as always is paying premium after buying the hype of a perfect, silver bullety wonder weapon.

At the end of the day the Power of the Individual has only one recourse in the face of an useless State: emigration. Does India have a lot of potential? Yes and so does a ton of other countries. But without the State you don't have industrialization, you don't develop the means of production, you don't create the basis by which wealth is generated, and so on. You can't mindset yourself away from a lack of infrastructure. That's the problem with all the people who think India will become wealthy just because it's 'China except free'. You might as well bet that Brazil is the next Canada.

They probably figure that if they can't win with Biden then winning isn't worth it. Trump wins, they get to fundraise a lot. A non liberal candidate wins as a Democrat and that's anathema to them. Another liberal candidate wins, odds are Biden would have won.

It's not unreasonable either. If the republicans have 'criticisms' of Biden wether they are rooted in reality or not (they often are, until you get to immigration), you'll be lending them credibility if you choose to change the party lead for the election. Now or two years ago, doesn't really matter. Plus, you'd be ruining the last year of Biden's presidency.

I for one also think that insiders and bureaucrats kinda enjoy the leeway they are given when the President is only aware of reality half of the time.

the civil war will be about who can most civilly reach across the aisle

Teamsters, farmers, and so on. Some groups just have too much inherent ability to fuck things over, no matter how gaslit they become by state media.

Even so, I guess land is just nearly as concentrated in Europe as in other places. The farmers are Europe's petite bourgeois.

I think with the sanctions in the red sea you have a massive reduction in what LNG Europe can get from most of the world, and that this new market imbalance would worsen things on the US inflation front. The americans are just leaving the Euros to dry on this one.

more like a sparkling space opera am i right

Hyperbole here but sometimes I feel like half of EU policy hinges on how much they can subsidize farmers and landowners.

The question I have is wether this ruling can be used against propaganda in the West. Given that Germany and the US in particular are using the full power of the State to ruin the lives of people who criticize Israel, I assume the fact that the ICJ had to order Israel to stop inciting a genocide and to actually start preventing one is a good cudgel against the media.

It's not like a court would ever prevent the actual genocidal war from happening. If courts could that do we wouldn't have an an alliance that goes from the levant all the way to Yemen to fight off US occupation and the israeli occupation forces.

i was about to say that milei took over after this, so wowzers. but then i remembered that it is brazil which has a weird transition of power on january 1st. milei took office on december 10th