Interesting, why do you say "a decade ago"? Peaks are only identifiable in retrospect, but what would mark "peak baby" then, that was more peak that current events?
If I may go a step further in history: tearing up the JCPOA (AKA the Iran deal) was like shouting from a megaphone "the US word means nothing now". Even the Palestine situation could've been predicted 6 years before Oct 7th when the US was the very first nation to move the embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, before 5 others followed (none of them "significant").
Things have definitely accelerated in the second term, but it's not like there weren't signs that political leaders definitely noticed were disruptive, even if the wider public weren't as aware at the time.
I do wonder how far certain acts could go in rebuilding the trust.
Ie real actual legal liability. Line up anyone who did insider trading, the doge guys, the big mouths in the big house, and put them through a zero tolerance military tribunal.
No bullshit kangaroo court where they're let off with a slap on the wrist because they're rich.
I mean strip every last one of these motherfuckers of everything they're worth. 180 the kangaroo court. Make a public mockery of them. Posters everywhere.
Think of it as a peace offering for the rest of the world. We could even include the war on terror guys in there, all the liars who claimed WMDs could go to the same federal prison. No cushions.
The Supreme Court doesn’t care. That’s the #1 sign the country is over, it’d take a miracle to get out of this decline. And then everyone is just going to be pardoned. There were no ethics baked into the constitution, that was the fatal flaw, even businesses have such things to prevent lawsuits or internal drama or issues
> The rest of the world would then take a wait and watch approach.
Agreed, as I have said before (1) even if the next administration is very different, that has happened before in 2020-2024. The lesson that the USA just is a country that does this from time to time. Expecting it to happen a third time is reasonable. Wait and watch would be an appropriate response.
"Hey sorry all these guys completely hijacked our checks and balances in their favor, we're going to remove them completely from societal circulation and try again"
The calculation is that of course there are defences, but if you have a big stockpile of $20K drones, and your opponent has a limited number of $2mil drone interceptors, then you can keep throwing drones and keeping your opponent busy there, and you're coming out ahead even before one finally gets through.
If I try to rob a bank with a plastic toy gun, the charge which I would be arrested for would not be "bad behavior that had no chance of accomplishing anything", it would be "bank robbery". Just "bank robbery", full stop. The abject failure of my attempt would have no bearing at all on that charge.
The argument that "he had no chance of accomplishing anything" has no bearing at all on intent.
"He didn't try" is not in any sense the same thing as "he was nowhere close to succeeding". The goalposts have moved between those 2 statements.
A done attack is utterly predictable though? Ukraine and Russia have been doing drone attacks on each other by air, sea and on land for years now. To great effect. It should be expected, not surprising at all.
A Shahed drone costs $20K each. The Patriot missile interceptor costs $4 Mil each.
And the inevitable result is that the interceptors run out first
https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/iran-war-israel-tells-us-...
https://www.economist.com/international/2026/03/13/gulf-stat...
https://bsky.app/profile/mekka.mekka-tech.com/post/3mgrvx5gr...
The only lasting solution to low-cost drone attacks is low-cost defences. Ukraine knows this. The US apparently does not yet. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/3/10/what-are-the-ukrain...
But the end result is not "low-cost drones are just a fad." it's drones vs. more drones vs. yet more drones.
reply