>>>If someone needs something they should have it.
What mechanism will exist to validate conflicting "needs" of different people in the not-so-distant future? Extreme example: we can't give everyone their own mansion with a beachfront view in order to prevent triggering them.
Triple-strand concertina wire isn't that expensive, put that around the perimeter with a single entry control point. Two guards on shift, 4 hours on/8 hours off, twice per day = 4 bodies. Double that to cut the days worked down to 3-5 per week with some flex capacity, keep people well-rested and alert. A quick search indicates an Egyptian military sergeant earns roughly $220/month, so 8 guys @$250 month = $2000 in wages monthly, and a pretty small outlay for equipment (the concertina wire, some rifles, flashlights, comm gear- radios/cellphones, maybe a tablet to verify access rosters).....Even hooking up some perimeter sensors to a computer workstation and generator power wouldn't be more than a low 5-figure investment.
Basic physical security should not be an unreasonable cost burden when there is so much national economic and social interest in preserving Egyptian history.
A fair point on the ease of corrupting private contractors. If anything that suggests the National government should provide security, and bank on the cultural pride/integrity/professionalism of the military to serve as a bullwark (for whatever that is worth). Secondary control measures to reduce corruption risk complicates things but still should explode the budget into the millions or anything.
>>>It has nothing to do with terrorism, it is purely for military domination and imperialism
Nitpick: military domination is not an end-goal in and of itself. Arguably, it is (rightly or wrongly) the US government's primary methodology for enforcing continuance of the Petrodollar system and US global economic domination. Most of the military actions revolve around ensuring the security of Saudi Arabia, the key player in OPEC.
I've tried to find scholarly articles on what the US economy might look like without the Petrodollar. Maybe my Google Scholar-fu is weak, but there's not a lot of useful, detailed projections beyond "not good".
The notion of US 'Imperialism' in any classical sense is so obviously false, it's hard to consider it needs a response.
The US occupied vast swaths of the world after WW2, and instead of permanent occupation and extraction of wealth and resources, the US set up, where it could some of the most successful civilizations in history.
Contrast that with almost every other Imperial power in history, and even current regimes such as USSR/Russia, China etc..
In fact, the only successful Asian states i.e. Japan, Singapore, Taiwan, S. Korea, and Hong Kong - were established and reformed by Anglo-American powers.
More obviously, the US keeps House of Saud in power, liberated Kuwait and Iraq - and could have easily used this opportunity for massive wealth extraction.
If the US were an 'Imperial Power' the entire surpluses of the Oil wealth of the entire Middle East would be in the pockets of the US - long ago.
The US didn't make a dime in Iraq, as most Oil contracts went to other nations (i.e. Total) and most of the Oil goes elsewhere, including to China.
But far from that, US foreign policy is mostly dedicated to stability (which benefits the US economy), hopefully through Western Liberal institutions and possibly even democracy but that of course is more of an aspiration than otherwise.
And of course, we're not even getting into issues such as 'freedom of navigation' of international waters, the Suez Canal, the Panama Canal (and soon S. China sea) by all participants, including Russia, China, Iran - which is guaranteed by the US Navy - and were US power to not exist, there would be no such thing as 'open seas'.
And not counting the 'Big Peace' in the ME between Egypt and Israel which is kept intact by major geopolitical contributions including by far the largest cash outflows of direct foreign aid by any nation to any other nation in the world, which is of course by the US to Egypt and Israel respectively.
And though it's hard to tell for sure, more likely than not: Taiwan.
And on and on.
That the US makes poor choices is obvious, but it's equally obvious they are not an Imperial power.
> In fact, the only successful Asian states i.e. Japan, Singapore, Taiwan, S. Korea, and Hong Kong - were established and reformed by Anglo-American powers.
I think that says enough about your worldview to preclude engaging with you. I suppose I should be wistful that my country didn't have the opportunity to be nuked and/or occupied by Anglo-Americans. (A specious enough category as it is)
It takes a certain level of historical ignorance and narcissism over and above your garden variety American-exceptionalism to say something like:
> The US occupied vast swaths of the world after WW2, and instead of permanent occupation and extraction of wealth and resources, the US set up, where it could some of the most successful civilizations in history.
>>>This reads to me like saying "the best way to determine if god exists is to read the hebrew bible, the koran, and the book of mormon and take the average".
That's kinda what led Aleister Crowley to create Thelema. In a very broad sense, he learned about belief systems from around the world, especially focused on "Messiah" type characters and the similarities in their experiences/stories/methods of enlightment, and then built a system that was somewhat of a fusion of all methodologies, largely as an extension of Jewish mysticism.
Part of the problem with sticking to recently-published books is the lag time involved. Consuming a variety of current news sources can not only lead you toward a "ground truth" for that particular case, but can also frame a better understanding of other evolving situations, and arm you with a better frame of reference to not only understand those as well, but shape your actions in yet a third actively-developing scenario.
>>>But what they don't tell you is their experience level, the context of how they came to believe Y, or really any supporting understanding of whether Y is an actual technical tradeoff that needs to be considered.
Yes, thankyou! I think about this every time I see "Systems are so powerful we can just throw RAM/CPU cycles at every problem, efficiency doesn't matter..." as if everyone on the planet is doing web apps, and there are no engineering/architectural situations that might drive certain languages or design principles. Such as this:
My physical education teacher in High School was the spitting image of Trajan (this was late 90s). We were blown away the first time we saw a picture of Trajan in our texts. He used to call his Cadillac a "battlewagon" but after we showed him the picture he called it a "chariot" instead. Fun memories..
>>>I know the word and its meaning and my initial reaction was negative because I thought "this has very little metaphorical value for a physics engine." You think of kinesis, movement, reactions.... Rapier is - to me - just an inanimate object.
I looked at is as implying lightweight, nimble, and functional efficiency for small-scale uses, much like its namesake. I would assign much different metaphorical implications to something named "Zweihander" (Germanic two-handed sword) or an even more esoteric French polearm name such as "Bec de corbin" (a name probably only known to hoplophiles).
Trump lets the States exercise their Constitutional authority[2]
TDS Sufferer: "Trump is a disappointingly-WEAK dictator!"[3]
It really is bizarre. As you say, there are things he's legitimately punting into the stands, such as his ham-fisted counter to the rise of China (great concept, abysmal execution).[4]
I'm a black American and I've been pulled over twice here in Japan (in the past 5 years) for what I concluded was basically "Driving While Black". I still think "Abolish/defund the police" are terrible slogans and equally terrible policy positions to take. But I continue to live in Japan because I know that the police here aren't inclined to put a bullet in my ass either. I like the Japanese "koban" model for deploying police forces. I also recognize that the overall baseline level of violence, and the proliferation of firearms, presents a vastly different force protection situation for urban American police than it does for their Japanese counterparts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C5%8Dban
There's a ton of problems I have law enforcement in the US, and the bulk of it boils down to terrible screening of personnel and inappropriate training. Fixing both of those issues will require more funding, not less. Better psychological screening (to eliminate sociopaths), higher pay (to retain quality personnel, and be able to rotate people off the streets more frequently), longer training and with different curriculum (stop learning tactics from Israeli counter-insurgency personnel), etc...
What mechanism will exist to validate conflicting "needs" of different people in the not-so-distant future? Extreme example: we can't give everyone their own mansion with a beachfront view in order to prevent triggering them.