[flagged]
Japan kinda went through the same problem in 80s/90s, but from a different angle. The problem is, US can't pull the same on China as it did with Japan.
If anything, a better standpoint is: Illogical and cavalier use of deadly force should scare our enemies, because it makes expression of our nation's military power more unpredictable. If China invades Taiwan; Trump might just blow up the Three Gorges Dam. Other Presidents might move with care, logic, and intrinsic sanctity for human life; Trump doesn't.
How do you reconcile that with:
> scare our enemies (and they) might move with care, logic, and intrinsic sanctity for human life
They have always been emboldened.
They didn't steal "secrets", but they almost certainly were covertly supplied with US nuclear material with the tacit approval of the CIA.
As for the claim about killing US sailors, here's GDF's vid on the attack against the USS Liberty: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CfABflKvFzk
Gaza happened under Biden's watch, and continued under Trump.
This is the first time the lie has worked to this extent.
Death to America is a great motto, but that's all it really is, they sadly lack the capability to follow through with it. With or without these latest strikes.
Maybe Harris wouldn't have gone this far, but the democrats were happy to carry water for Israel for a long time.
I'd argue their unflinching support was also a key to priming the American public for this moment.
Fully and unquestioningly supporting whatever Israel does is practically a requirement for all American politicians.
There no evidence to support that. US policy has been to fully support Isreal, full stop. At least under Biden there was talk of suspending arms supplies due to Gaza, Trump just wants a shot at that beach front real estate. Not comparable at all.
I'm also no fan of war or playing world police. I don't know whether destroying Iranian nuclear sites was ultimately the right or wrong decision. But there is clearly enough debate here in the rest of the comments that it's not obviously the wrong option. Even a broken clock can be right twice a day.
In any case, it certainly doesn't weigh towards "not belligerent". I'm no Trump supporter or apologist, I just don't see how one can claim that this action changes the calculus for Russia and China. Maybe if he really had fully abandoned Ukraine then yes. But he's been happy to attack Yemen and Iran (and possibly Greenland for that matter) so why would China think they are immune? I suspect he also harbors more racism towards China than Russia.
As usual he is contradicting his own intelligence apparatus saying the mission was a failure - he and his administration keep lying to us all making sure you always use the word “obliterated“ to sound big and strong. Even Israel says they didn't do the damage Trump is claiming.
I'm being a bit mean I suppose, it's not actually stupidity. It's naivety and fierce propaganda campaigns. Everyone longs for a simpler time and the domestic economic struggles of the US are plain.
I mean look at how he’s handled the “ceasefire” so far. He’s an embarrassment and unbelievably incompetent. He’s a petulant child.
I've watched many people deteriorate mentally and their are many routes. Biden was clearly the "i misplace stuff" route, not "i will now attack an ally".
He definitely shouldn't have been allowed to run for president again but Trump is far more belligerent. I'm not even necessarily opposed to his actions in Iran. But he's now verbally, fiscally, or actually attacked several allies and enemies. He'll likely attack more. I think it's fine to argue for or against his actions. But it's silly to equate the scale of his actions, or risk of mental deterioration, with Biden. The stakes are much higher, the strong allies and enemies are all making reactive bold moves in response. Things are moving fast now.
And sure, the resources spent on make-work bureaucracy running would be better used elsewhere, even if it was just paying people to walk through their local parks and pick up litter. But we're pretty bad at resource allocation, especially resources from that centralized fountain of new money that seems to be necessary due to Gresham's law. So make-work paper pushing is still better than just giving those resources to asset holders via banks bidding up the everything bubble. Given that those resources are going to be somewhat wasted somehow, the authoritarianism seems like the more important part to be focusing on.
(as for the numbers from the Ministry of LLM Slop, understanding is harder than generation, so I don't see the point of trying to scrutinize them rather than doing a good faith analysis to begin with)