pull down to refresh
The failure is knowing the vulnerability and entering the war without an adequate backup. Then Bahrain was hit, the Navy’s main replacement hub was 2,200 miles away, and the sailors were hung out to dry to absorb the consequences.
You keep calling the backup inadequate as if that proves the point. What was the realistic alternative the Navy should have had in place?
A commander-in-chief competent enough to plan for his own war.
That's not an alternative logistics plan. That's just naming who you want to blame. This is going nowhere fast...as usual.
@coffeebadger summed it up best:
“Most ‘investors’ think Bitcoin is a joke. I could have told them that my guy was going to expend all remaining fiat leverage on war. I want the government to collapse so that the other party can’t use it against me.”
The war was reckless from the start, and they entered it without an adequate logistics plan.
Reckless war he thought he could win in weeks, with no Plan B. That is my entire argument.
This is the logistics plan.
- Stir shit up
- Escalate to the PRC
- ???
- Liberty or Death
And it's freaking genius. Because China is in the same Constitutional Republic vs Communist Revolution civil war that we're in. Their struggle, like ours, is the struggle of all mankind. And we have to strike now before our domestic communists secede or take back DC.
The logistics are for you and I to figure out together. You have to choose between me or the DSA.
I like it. Finally, someone actually gave a plan.
That’s not a plan. It’s gibberish,
but I do enjoy how perfectly scripted his response are.
A known wartime vulnerability becoming a problem when the enemy attacks it isn’t proof of failed leadership.