3 ms·
thats a weird take, very defensive. But, since youre sure about it I guess everyone should be too. I'm sure no one is trying to destroy US democracy either or
by _tomcat_ 4y ago
thats a weird take, very defensive.
But, since youre sure about it I guess everyone should be too.
I'm sure no one is trying to destroy US democracy either or stage insurrections, etc. oh wait...
If I had to guess, I'd say it was intentional and all about money.
That could make it illegal. Even if they didn't intend to lose in combat, it still gave US soldiers a handycap.
- some_random 4y agoSo to sum things up, you're suggesting that either US army officials in 2004 chose UCP to weaken the US military in preparation for a fascist coup in 2020 OR they chose a US gov owned pattern over commercial patterns to make money (somehow)? And you're calling my response defensive and weird lmao
- PastaArt 4y agoThey said their guess is "money". This looks like your trying to put words in someone elses mouth. The examples of corruption in government seems to be just that, examples. Im not sure why you try to act like they all need to be tied together somehow? Seem pretty defensive & weird.
- some_random 4y agoAlright so to avoid putting words in anyone's mouth, please outline how corruption could have caused the US to fast track a pattern it developed itself rather than one of the superior commercial patterns that they would have had to pay royalties on.
- _tomcat_ 4y ago[dead]
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]