>therefore are funds that the government is actually legally authorized (and even required) to spend
Hasn't Trump and the unitary executive theorists decided that since the executive actually administrates the departments and moves funding, that the executive can just decide to not send money to, or fire the staff from any given executive function Congress authorises?
While the courts may not agree with the new theory, it's a lot easier for Trump to destroy and delay than it is for the courts or Congress to compel him to rebuild and fund.
It's a good thing the Trump admin are reasonably incompetent. It's been fascinating to look behind the curtain when things get leaked or mistakenly released.
Imagine if you had shown a Trump supporter this future during the end of the Biden Presidency. All the campaigning and moralising over the price of eggs and gas. The desire for isolationism. All the condemnation over the 'botched' Afghanistan withdrawl.
Now Trump starts a war that'll make the COVID inflation look cute and fun, with apparently very little preparation, and it's got 2/3 Republican support.
We could have reciprocity laws. If a country won't respect software licences, or permits hacking gangs as long as they don't rob from their own, then they should get the same treatment in return.
I don't understand why this conspiratorial belief has persisted. The restrictions ended. They happened worldwide. They were clearly for the safety of the public and the functioning of the health system during a novel virus epidemic.
I love the containers too. My current use case is to keep my YouTube account separate from my Google one. Google doesn't need all that behavioural data in one place.
It's a pity Firefox doesn't get the praise it deserves half as much as it cops criticism.
There are places in Gaza that are agricultural and suitable for rocket launches. It's not residential blocks from fence to fence.
Hamas is motivated to damage Israel's international reputation as much as possible. (Not that Netanyahu isn't helping with that). Deliberately launching from civilian areas then condemning Israeli retaliation is in alignment with Hamas rethoric and incentives.
If a Hamas rocket hit civilian areas nearby the Israeli military HQ and Hamas said it was the target, then it would be a militarily justified launch.
US managed to use ground forces against the Taliban without leveling the city.
So you do think Hamas stay around after launching a rocket? As it would take quite a few minutes for Israel to determine launch location, get a plane in the air and drop it on that location. Then they use block leveling bombs rather than a smaller precision bomb.
Do you think the lies and denial for the buried ambulances case or the killing of journalists like Shireen Abu Akleh were just one off cases?
No, it's likely retaliation with a military excuse.
>US managed to use ground forces against the Taliban without leveling the city.
Not in Raqqa or parts of Mosul. Dense urban fighting produces major destruction. Neither was Afghanistan a sealed, prepared, hyper-dense urban enclave. The Taliban largely withdrew from key cities rather than making their last stand inside them. If you check the state department reports [1], neither did the USA use troops to assault entrenched Taliban positions. It was bombing, and then local proxy infantry.
>So you do think Hamas stay around after launching a rocket?
Probably not. But the alternative is Israel just intercepting rockets with no retaliation which is unrealistic.
>Then they use block levelling bombs rather than a smaller precision bomb.
They use a variety of munitions with varying sizes and precision.
>Do you think the lies and denial for the buried ambulances case or the killing of journalists like Shireen Abu Akleh were just one off cases?
I think many Israelis have been radicalised (like the Palestinians) and several army commanders are perpetrating war crimes and atrocities. I don't think their system directs or encourages it, but it certainly doesn't do enough to prevent it. The fog of war, deference to people on the ground, the bullshit the radicalised commanders feed upward, and the political cover from the extremism of the Israeli cabinet cause the system to defend the atrocities. Although, sometimes, when the case is very obviously unjust, Israelis are held to account.
This isn't sexist, it's reality. It's the rationale for male conscription and male disposability.
reply