There aren't a lot of alternatives - the amount of mass killing going on right now is unusually high. People can't spend all day frothing with moral outrage at the horror of it all. If something is routine there isn't much of an alternative than to discuss it as routine.

This article is actually unusually good, I wouldn't be surprised if the site was generally anti-war. It isn't unusual for the level of analysis to be "we're the in-group, we're morally right, they're the out-group, we can't imagine they're competent, lets kill them it'll be easy". The moment people start doing serious analysis they become well-armed pacifists. As a case study; this war is part of a trend of the US hurting itself in aid of ... nothing useful for the US. The only silver lining is I don't see the Trump presidency surviving this and that might be a lesson to the next guy about trying to start fights.

▲

div 7 hours ago | parent [-]

It’s really quite amazing how the US went in without seemingly an iota of planning beyond “kill ayatollah for regime change”, but at this rate we will see US regime change before Iranian.

▲

ZeroGravitas 6 hours ago | parent [-]

Enough planning for the Secretary of War to buy defense stocks and the son of the president to own a drone manufacturing company.

Just not planning for anything that might help "make America great again".

	▲	ryandrake 23 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		It's really this simple. People seem so confused as to why this administration is doing this and why this administration is doing that, but it's clearly about personal enrichment of leaders. It's not some complex 5D chess game. If you want to know why Trump did this or why Hegseth did that or why Bondi did thus, just look at who placed bets, owns stock, owns companies, and/or will be personally enriched by the decision. That's all there is to it.