Exactly the point.
ragepaw
joined 2 years ago
The point is not whether it's good or not. The Army told the govenrment multiple times, they don't need them and they are being wasted.
If you read that article, that point was made.
And they said, you could maintain the minimum level of production by foreign owners alone.
Those weapons systems aren't being bought because they're needed or work well.
No. Because the antediluvians running the party don't understand why they keep losing. Maybe they should try a tactic other than "Stop, or I'll say stop again.
I read the BBC article your link cited.
A couple of really telling points.
- "Numbers really matter for building power in ways that can really pose a serious challenge or threat to entrenched authorities or occupations,”
What it doesn't say is what happens when support against regime change is >50%. 2/3rd of the US population through either direct support (voted for) or indirect support (couldn't care to vote), put a convicted criminal racist rapist who was very clear what he was going to do, in power.
- No mention of foreign backed influence campaigns
How many of those non-violent campaigns had foreign intelligence support for them, and how many against? The CIA, FSB (KGB) and many others had their fingerprints all over so many of those. Certainly today, we know without a doubt that Trump has been and likely still is supported by the FSB. And yet, not a disqualifier.
- The study considered a successful non-violent protest, only if it resolved in under a year
People have been protesting so long against him that some people who were in diapers when he announced his intentions to run, will be old enough to vote in the next election. If there is one.
- The scope of the study is poor
As a historical study, it's great. But in terms of analyzing the current modern state, nothing older than 20 years should be considered. Technology has changed the game so much that comparing the world of today to the world of pre-2000 is useless. 20 years may even be too much.
Twitter helped overthrow the Egyptian regime, but today is owned by one of the people running the regime.
While the scope is too wide, it's also too narrow because it only goes back to 1900. It misses some very important events.
- French Revolution
- American Revolution
- The Haitian Revolution
- The War of Mexican Independence
- Many revolutions in a 20 year period in Central and South America
- The Belgian Revolution
There is more, and I kept the scope for the same approximate period of time as the study did.
What's important to note here, is the study looked at a post WW1 world where the League of Nations and the UN provided a place to air a countries dirty laundry and organize counters against them like public shaming and sanctions. A large part of the success being the support of the United States. Today, the US is actively dismantling the institutions that kept the world from needing violence for positive change.
It also excludes regime changes using foreign military support. So no;
- Mexican Revolution
- Bolshevik Revolution
- Guatemala
- Congo
- Iran
- Vietnam
- And many more
And the most important example, because it has the most significance to today...
- WW2, where the world's most militarily powerful nation, elected a racist, fascist, speed addicted dictator, who used tight control of the information sources to push an evil agenda that destabilized the world and led to the deaths of millions. A regime incidentally, that saw mass protests. But to paraphrase myself, they really did fuck all.
So here I sit in 1937 Poland, listening to the Orange Oberbefehlshaber talk about how all of the countries around are taking advantage of them, and how large sections of the population of those countries support him, and how Vichy Alberta wants to join them....
How many fucks do you think I'll give about protests against him when US tanks are rolling down my street.
The protests have proven to be irrelevant and ignored. Trump and his idiocy has been protested for a decade. He's been convicted of crimes, he was declared by a court to be a rapist, when he speaks, he clearly has mush for brains, people close to him have called him a racist, he formented an insurrection. And yet here we are.....
Clearly holding up signs, even in large groups is doing fuck all.
Thomas Jefferson had something to say about what the situation calls for.
It's hard to get a prostitute to stop prostituting. Especially for the ones who chose out of desperation or were forced into it.
But you go after the john, who has money and probably something to lose, like a job or family, and you can scare them away.
Note: I'm against criminalizing prostitution, I'm just explaining their reasoning, not agreeing with it.
Both can be true. He could have done it, and the cops could have planted evidence.
I don't understand why so many Americans don't get that. I hear, Canadians are upset at tariffs. I hear, Canadians are worried about border issues.
Both are true.
But that's not why we're enraged. It's because an unhinged, racist, sexist, authoritarian, mentally challenged dictator has threatened to destroy our country and everyone there is doing fuck all about it.
It's also factually incorrect. While Poilievre lost his seat, he's staying on as leader and attempting to win another in a by-election.
So he isn't really booted to the curb because his party kept him. Or least for today, they're supposed to hold a secret vote tomorrow.
Or he finds a way to turn them evil.