>>12708933 (lb)
>I always believed there was a deeper meaning to that than charity
For the public persona/optics, it works, too. But "Q" always seemed to neat to work unless there was absolute control, or at least a knowing that things would eventually have to fall into place, and there's no real guarantee in American politics that someone is 100% controllable unless there's some sort of threat of force to back it. I think that's why No Name got his comeuppance so quickly.
Movie? Script? Great actors? No-fail mentality? Biblical allegory? Patriots in control? There's only one way to make any of that a remote possibility. The military has to truly be in control.