1. "both a test and a warning sign"
2. Evidence Trump has no intention of turning the country into a military dictatorship.
You choose the more exptreme interpretation (#1) instead of the obvious one (#2)?
When the military was deployed then peacefully left, you still viewed that as an increase in the risk of a military takeover?
Even though the troops were withdrawn?
I’m just trying to understanding this upside down world where when something doesn’t happen it’s proof it’s more likely to happen in the future.
The Marine entered AND LEFT Los Angelas. Russia never did that.
If you had said “while the Marines were deployed the risk is higher” it’s at least logical.
But the fact they left without incident yet you think it’s proof of the opposite outcome is hard to understand.