How's that for foresight

[Tuxan]

I was going to say I think Trump is owned by the MIC, too, but then it occurred to me that he wants to replace a lot of the government with his lackeys, and that might make government too hard for the MIC to control. Not to mention exacerbate the culture war and push us closer to civil war, which is bad for business.
Anyway, armchair analysis.

While Trump took some actions that could be seen as contrary to the interests of the military-industrial complex, particularly in his foreign policy and rhetoric about "endless wars," his administration also significantly increased defense spending and facilitated major arms deals.

He also planned to dramatically increase spending on things like nuclear weapons and missile shields. He militarized space by creating a new and expensive separate space command.

 

[Ricter]

While Trump took some actions that could be seen as contrary to the interests of the military-industrial complex, particularly in his foreign policy and rhetoric about "endless wars," his administration also significantly increased defense spending and facilitated major arms deals.

He also planned to dramatically increase spending on things like nuclear weapons and missile shields. He militarized space by creating a new and expensive separate space command.

Good points. Perhaps it is just the culture divisiveness that he fuels that's too much for our oligarchs. I imagine they, not by design but by alignment of interests, like a balanced, simmering feud among the working class, not open warfare.

 

[Tuxan]

Good points. Perhaps it is just the culture divisiveness that he fuels that's too much for our oligarchs. I imagine they, not by design but by alignment of interests, like a balanced, simmering feud among the working class, not open warfare.

The movie Canadian Bacon foresaw it all. A nice, long and expensive, cold war.

 

[Tsing Tao]

Good points. Perhaps it is just the culture divisiveness that he fuels that's too much for our oligarchs. I imagine they, not by design but by alignment of interests, like a balanced, simmering feud among the working class, not open warfare.

Please. The oligarchs don't give one shit about divisiveness. In fact, the more divisive we are, the safer they feel. If we were all united in cause, they'd be under the microscope where they should be.

 

[Buy1Sell2]

Nikki Haley, 02/2024:
“The party that gets rid of their 80-year-old candidate is the party that will win. There will be a female president of the United States. It will either be me or it will be Kamala Harris. If Republicans nominate Donald Trump, it will be Kamala Harris.”

Drop the mic.

Noteworthy and impressive, both women are at least half Indian, adding to the long list of Indian CEOs in America.

Kammy hasn't won.

 

[Ricter]

Please. The oligarchs don't give one shit about divisiveness. In fact, the more divisive we are, the safer they feel. If we were all united in cause, they'd be under the microscope where they should be.

Maybe I wrote that wrong. That's what I mean, divide and rule works for them. But I was saying that can get out of hand.

 

[VicBee]

Good points. Perhaps it is just the culture divisiveness that he fuels that's too much for our oligarchs. I imagine they, not by design but by alignment of interests, like a balanced, simmering feud among the working class, not open warfare.

I don't think "they" need to do anything. Our working class is so intellectually impoverished that anything triggers their anger, hatred and sense of entitlement.

 

[Atlantic]

Kammy hasn't won.

don't forget - republicans vote on nov. 6th