Hegseth dismatled units whose work was "ensuring this does not happen all that often". They were too soft and woke Then bragged about lethality. Then president proceeded to threaten more war crimes then again in escalating amounts.
Same people are murdering civilian on boats in pacific.
I’d honestly argue—in 2026—it’s more important for Americans to understand black history today than the Vietnam war. The idiots who keep propelling Presidents into the Oval who repeat Vietnam’s mistakes in Iraq, Afghanistan and now Iran are folks with a terrible understanding of our racial history and way too much surface knowledge about big guns and materiel.
What currently constitutes these studies seems to be a mix of propaganda and bullshit. But that sort of underlines the point that we have an impoverished set of common facts.
I think it's probably pretty important to teach that the government lied about the Gulf of Tonkin incident and Saddam's WMDs, and that the history of the last half century has been the federal government constantly starting wars for no benefit to the American people, often under false pretenses.
While we're at it we can teach how the government conducted a biological attack on San Francisco to see what would happen if there were a biological attack on San Francisco, sold weapons to terrorists, let people's syphilis go untreated intentionally so they could see what happens (to be fair that falls under black history), conducted torture experiments on Americans (possibly accidentally creating the unabomber), was caught spying on all of us, and developed plans that they brought to the president to conduct false flag attacks on Americans to start another war. But they definitely wouldn't still do any of that. And the other things people say are crazy conspiracy theories.
Those subcultures are like that because they are small. If that became the lot of most people, society would look very different. The choice would be between Fully Automated Luxury Communism and Oligarchic Hellscape.
This is assume SHE is guilty of a massive lie. The assumption is that she is trying to baselessly destroy him. Otherwise said, the benefit of the doubt is not symmetrical.
Yes we give the accused the benefit of the doubt and require the prosecution to meet a high burden of proof to overturn that. It is not symmetric by design.
That severely depends on legal and social system you operate it. It is not universal truth, that was artifact some concrete historical period. And the loss is frequently result of large war, revolution, violent displacement, that sort of thing.
reply