I'd wager the majority were civilians.
I'll never understand how you can justify classifying every male about 16 as a combatant. The US was literally invading other nations and killing their kids. Like specifically targeting them in precision strikes.
It was part of my argument against your desire not to change what is currently broken
But i did want changes and explicitly lined them out.....
Right issues on promary length is fine. You quickly pivoted into "dems are bad and out of touch" as a point of policy. Not due to length of the primary. You were right with those thoughts just not at all what I was talking about.
Tbh, it's exhausting. If the dems even hint at doing something slightly better it quickly becomes an absolute dog pile of "since the dems are not becoming literally perfect overnight this is still bad". Like I'm starting to think people don't want any improvement in our political systems
I have mixed feelings on the matter. When the state can force you to comitt atrocities each person is going to have to weigh at what point are they willing to forfeit their own lives.
If your military is committing war crimes then they're probably not above imprisioning you for a very long time or just executing you. So at what point does your morals outweigh your innate drive to survive? This gets more complicated if you have a family back home.
Of course this goes away when you are looking at a voluntary military. Part of the reason the US went this route. They can grab the desperate/poor and feed them into the war machine. The average citizen then ignores the suffering and the country never creates ladders out of poverty so they can keep a steady supply of soldiers.
All in all it's pretty fucked
Also a archaeologist, very unusual that your department didn't pay for this.
Man I didn't mean to call the party perfect or desirable in any way. I was just trying to express how I do think longer primaries can be beneficial but the current system should be reworked.
If you want to complain, and rightfully so, how bad the dems are there's at least 20 other threads where that is the exact topic of conversation. You don't have to force it in here
You still get to see how they handle under pressure. Which i think is important especially when picking a residential canidate.
And here I thought it was getting onto their knees, opening their mouths, and allowing the lord's body into their receiving and patient mouths
Following a democratic voting guide has got to be the least progressive you can be as a Democrat
I kinda get why they drag it out, it allows canidates to respond to the electorate better.
My suggestion would be to make it take 3 months and divide the delegates evenly between all 3. Hell let Iowa be a week early. Plus with ranked choice if a canidate drops out those votes can be reallocated
I do just feel like there's something about these long races that allow us to get a much better idea of who a canidate is. Once they begin to feel the pressure they start to change.
No no you misunderstand and male that appeared over 16 based on drone footage was considered a target. They didn't have to be armed. The only crime these kids committed was being outside.
Now how often do you think other people like women and younger children were killed in cold blood and written off as "appeared to be a male over 16"?