>>20165852

>the combatants are pawns in a game of 'how quickly can we skyrocket the prices

This maybe true, but by adhering to this policy would demonstrate that our top brass are not of that type. It is a win win situation for all players and there is no downside because it would prove where the nefarious intentions are.

We have to do our job to best of our abilities regardless of how others do their job. There maybe some serious violence within our own boarders, our Navy is basically a sitting target. This would take away the argument of all national and international aggressors and stop genocide. No downsides. After this gesture any form of aggression will not only be warranted by the US but justified.

>>20165873

If what I suggest works then it will reduce our costs, protect our service members, civilians, and police, and safeguard our cities from riots and property damage. no downsides.

>>20165865

>You sound like somebody who believes there is still some shred of goodness or honor among the high-ranking military or government officials in the USA. There is not

Wrong, Llyod Ausin created an international armada within an hour and a half after I suggested this very policy. Unfortunately he did not setup the humanitarian aid process and that has led to further violence and our own vessels being directly attacked.

>reduce the violence

Read post 107

>>20165866

That is a different issue, after this is resolved, we can change focus. Stay with the program but thanks for the input, on the todo list.

>>20165876

Because "please listen and heed", doesn't always work.