BillyB0nes

Join your military so you can go crush the regime? That's how the world solves its dictator problems. Other countries agree to come kill a lot of them and cripple their ability to express power. Then your country can power broker after the war, advance all their interests, start a culture of exceptionalism to compensate for their looted wealth. Then later on will find out your country started importing Americans as they sold company/state secrets left and right for their own safe passage. .ow they're slowly starting groups that spread hyper-capitalist ideology through out your police departments and draw in the heads of industry in your country. They advance their power by demonizing your most vulnerable groups and steadily gain a diseased momentum in your politics. No matter how much you point it out to others... no one understands you. They've slowly deamonized critical thinking and history lessons start to leave out more and more context so you can't actually talk to other members of your country about what's happening because their literal ability to interpret and evaluate what is happening has been specifically crippled. Now you're intellectually alone, in physical danger from persecution, and none of it was your fault because you genuinely tried to highlight the downfall around you and push movements to change the pattern.

Then when you go online you realize pathetically sad people exist everywhere...and they're all prepared to watch your country burn while high fiving each other for "Not being you".

Praise the Omnissiah

Diasgree. With no federal apparatus to guide the force of all 50 states they are weaker on their lonesome and calling aid from one to another is far more burdensome. Besides, red states rely on federal funding from taxes in blue states and would collapse without them. Red states are major crop producers that the blue states consume. Balance of powers is the best bet. It's not perfect but it's far superior to dissolving the federal government which would undoubtadly start inter-state and civil wars. Unfortunately, the human propensity for conflict is best utilized in keeping each other in check and is best coupled with rewarding those who suppress suppression and are prepared to employ violence against the violent.

That is one method to achieve the above, but the problem is we keep making more of them and always will. They don't just go away because you killed the strongest ones, it signals out to the others that a vacuum is available for them to inhabit. The system has to change to invalidate them or we just end up playing Psycho/Sociopath Whack-a-mole until eternity.

Good call, Major Dipshit. Remove the trained fighters cause they look icky. Replace them with battle twinks that he finds attractive /s ...what a fucking loser. I really shouldn't take the bait. It's all the target groups they hate, I doubt they actually give a shit one way or another, they just care because those groups are likely not to follow their orders when they inevitably tell them to target US citizens. The weakness they talk about is empathy and reason. They literally don't understand why restrained force exists, why war with rules is better than without, and why raw brutality is not the only focus of warriors. These are people who don't care about inefficacy of torture because they view it as a prize for winning - like a parade, but with suffering.

You'd hope. But with that list naming anti-capitalism as a marker for "terrorism", it could end up being a mechanism they use to remove those threats if they garner too much support. That's not in their best interests if they want to maintain power after the election but they've been enormously brazen with their behavior that it can't be ruled out.

Ensure the venture isn't profitable.

Was never about drugs. It was pretense to attack minorities groups the government didn't like. There is literal memo evidence of the people who enacted the policy admitting that was the purpose. They are skipping the pretense now.

It was segmented so it wasn't really at the ending for battlefield one but the beginning that has fucked me up for a long time. The game opens to a black screen, utter silence, and a description prints out of how wide and brutal the first world world war was. The last text that appears on the screen was, "What you are about to experience is front line combat. You are not expected to survive."

What they were describing was that they didn't expect you to play one character and that you should be dying to respawn in a new section of the map with new features. This was the most accurate depiction of the war possible, even if it was just meant to describe the mechanics of the level. It went further! Every time you died they showed a real name of a real soldier that lost their life in the war and their birth and death date. Most of these ages are under the age of 24.

After the final death, it plays a cut scene where two soldiers are pointing rifles at each other and they both break down and chose not to kill each other....I believe all of this gameplay and the cut scene are being played off as a PTSD nightmare he's having while recovering in a hospital.....one of those 'stare at a blank wall and rethink how fucking good our lives are' moments. Also a deviation to the standard which is having a good guy-winner/bad guy-loser. They instead opted for the "we're all losing because of this" realization...I don't think we'll ever see anything like it again.