It’s all up-front costs! /s

Username… checks out?

Don’t give them any ideas.

Now I’m imagining laser derby matches.

There’s multiple levels so the answer is “sort of.” Very generally, the Minister of Defense (or equivalent) has a national defense council that will have heads of armed forces and maybe a few senior civilian members. The council creates the overall battle plan with specific generals or admirals creating plans for specific battles or campaigns that conform to the overarching goals set by the defense council. The Prime Minister has a cabinet. The cabinet will receive info from the defense council. Intelligence agencies and departments involved with any economic warfare. The PM and cabinet can give direction to individual councils and departments to coordinate the overarching strategy of the entire country. The defense council will then adjust plans based on Cabinet’s directives. The PM is probably given detailed briefings of battlefield progress and aims for the military for the short-, medium-, and long-term for the conflict and can veto specific plans. But the PM won’t help to plan attacks or modify those plans usually. That’s the purview of generals and admirals.

36.005970N , 114.976380W

Your own comment above basically supports the definition of tankie. Specifically, this:

The term is also used to describe people who endorse, defend, or deny the crimes committed by communist leaders such as Vladimir Lenin,[9][10] Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong, Enver Hoxha, Pol Pot, and Kim il-Sung. In modern times, the term is used across the political spectrum to describe those who have a bias in favor of illiberal or authoritarian states with a socialist legacy or a nominally left-wing government, such as the Republic of Belarus, People’s Republic of China, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, the Republic of Nicaragua, the Russian Federation, the Republic of Serbia, the Syrian Arab Republic, and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. Additionally, tankies have a tendency to support non-socialist states with no socialist legacy if they are opposed to the United States and the Western world in general, regardless of their ideology,[4][11] such as the Islamic Republic of Iran. (emphasis mine)

I would take issue with the single word ‘fascist’ that @figaro@lemdro.id is using, as the government doesn’t need to be full-on fascist to it qualify for tankies to defend it. It only needs to be illiberal with a socialist legacy or nominally left-leaning government. So the definition is more broad than what figaro defines. But all the elements of Figaro’s defintion are literally there in your own linked Wikipedia article.

Someone has to take Ted Cruz to Mexico.

ADL would almost certainly file an anti-SLAPP claim and probably win. California’s anti-SLAPP law even says that it’s contents should be broadly considered as a bulwark against assholes using the courts to prevent public participation. If ADL does win an anti-SLAPP motion, Musk would end up paying their lawyers fees down to the cent.

It’s more like 2.5 billion for R&D and then 2.5 billion to create the factory that builds them and the first thousand units. The per unit cost is initially high and then comes down once all the front end work is done.

And as with many programs, the R&D phase may lead to a brand new use-case for drones or an entirely different purpose for one of the drone prototypes. So there can be unknown benefits too.

My three year old niece is in her choice phase. Every time I’ve seen her in the last six months, I ask for a hug and she smiles and says “noooooo!” Then rushes to give my wife a hug. I just let it go because she’s said no and that means no. Then usually later in the day she’ll pop around and give me a huge hug then. I’m hoping that means she learns that no means no, so when a boy later on tries to make it a “yes” she’ll make him understand it really does mean no.

Sexists close ranks around each other to protect their own. This probably only ends after the Spanish FA has been completely rebuilt.

Or, they have the greatest, most technologically advanced space navy, with the Mariner Valley full of Chinese-Texans who all speak with the Texan drawl.

This is golden!! :D

Poland would make quick work of Wagner. They have not fucked around in making their army one of the best in Europe in combined arms warfare. They’ve also updated their most of their materiel to Western gear (or are producing their own that is equal to Western gear) that we now know is dramatically superior to the old Soviet//Russian gear. They’ve been in on practically every peacekeeping mission across the world for the last 25 years, seasoning their officers with combat experience. They are far more competent than Wagner, to put it briefly.

Yep, people in Rochester were pissed to learn this. Instead of riding the wave, Kodak execs turned the company into a donkey.

30 minutes is generous. I’ve watched the aisle get trashed in 5 minutes when I took my son shoe shopping for school last year. We were the only ones who put things back.

Now there’s a community I’d follow!

This is how many new religions get going ironically. The key is that right now it’s a cult. It has to get out of cult status by opening up and appealing to the masses. You can see that Scientology has that problem, it’s grown but it’s not open to everyone and it still acts like a cult. It’ll be an ~~interesting ~~ terrifying hundred years if it continues…

Did the US provide direct training in how to destabilize and overthrow a government? Because they have teams that can provide that training. It’s routinely used in the Western hemisphere. If they gave the coup leaders anti-insurgency training, that’s an entirely different situation.

The problem is probably more coincidental. US training makes units better. There’s a base level of thought in the US military though which you can describe as “you follow orders of the duly elected representatives of the US government.” If you don’t instill that base thinking, all the training does is make military units that are going to succeed at coups.

So is this article dealing with the reality of trying to rewrite a foreign military’s thought process and it’s relationship to its civilian government? Does it discuss the difficulties in doing that while trying to train them for counterinsurgency operations? If it’s just making a casual (not causal) connection between the coup leaders and the fact that at some point those leaders had US training, it’s propaganda.