This is also — not true.
Infant/child mortality and infectious diseases like plagues, typhoid, small pox, and respiratory infections drove most pre-20th century deaths, not ‘violence’.
Perhaps you are conflating the deaths in actual combat with deaths caused by disease in armies? Historical fact shows that ~2/3 of the fatalities in major conflicts were due to disease, not actual violence. For example, in the American Civil war, only 1/3 of deaths were a direct result of combat, the other 2/3 were due to disease that plagued all large armies.
@DrNeilStone and ~3 in 10 children did not reach the age of 5
Almost everyone had bacterial infestations in their intestines
we used leeches to ‘cure’ disease..
I think he won’t accept Pahlavi because he knows that Pahlavi will not ‘bend the knee’ to him, just like he knew that Machado in Venezuela would not ‘bend the knee’ to him, so he refused to support her. He used almost the same wording to dismiss both.
He refused to support/arm the Peshmerga in Iraq, Kurds in Iran, and the various Arabic, Baloch, etc opposition within Iran, because they will also not ‘bend the knee’.
I know the internal political situation in Iran is far more complex than an X post can convey. Please forgive the ‘simplicity’ of this post.
I’m not sure Trump ever listened to Vance about anything. To Trump, Vance is convenient window dressing to appeal to his MAGA base, nothing more.
Vance had the temerity to object to the attack on Iran (as did Tulsi Gabbard.) Trump tossed both to the curb without a 2nd thought.
In my view, Trump listens to Laura Loomer, Wit(less)kof, and Kushner more than anyone else.
@AnotherKaveh@__Injaneb96 I am ashamed before the Iranian people for they way Trump has callously used them and for the vast amount of suffering they have suffered because they actually believed him in January, when he encouraged them to rebel and stated “Help is on the way!”, then did absolutely nothing.
Didn’t he also say, “a peace deal is a few days away”, just yesterday? Of course, as CNN has helpfully pointed out, he’s said that 37 times so far.
I have a degree in International Security Studies and understand ‘strategic ambiguity’ in negotiations, but I also understand this is NOT ‘strategic ambiguity’ (nor is it 4,5, or even 6D chess.)
Aren't the special-issue U.S. Treasury securities (non-marketable bonds available only to the Trust Funds) equivalent to an intra-governmental 'IOU' and, when they are redeemed - to cover shortfalls in SS - they are paid by the Treasury out of general funds, or, if we are in deficit (when are we not anymore?) they are paid by incurring equivalent public debt?