The article is relatively short, and I didn’t want to try and summarize it in case I introduce my own biases. Here is the subtitle:
The emphasis on making deals and showing quick results is coming at the cost of a long-term vision
The article is relatively short, and I didn’t want to try and summarize it in case I introduce my own biases. Here is the subtitle:
The emphasis on making deals and showing quick results is coming at the cost of a long-term vision
Long term vision has to decouple from US military empire. Any defense spending has to be to protect from US empire instead of being its usual colonial stooge for force amplification. Speaking of it makes more short term fires. Both short and long term pressure on foreign auto makers creates short term fires too. Assisting US’s demonic Latin America policy does not put out any short term fires.
So track 1 appears to be “do nothing so we can die slowly”. All discussion of track 2 is led by CIA stooges that want us to continue being CIA stooges. Absurd arctic defense scare instead of welcoming any investment that we are not doing for Arctic development.
Every speech permitted in track 2 discussions is traitorous speech. Failure to understand who our enemy is, and gaslighting that it is still the CIA enemies, puts track 2 firmly on the wrong track.