troops

China does have 2.3 million active troops and 700 million humans who would be able to serve if needed.

Would you hate Great Britain if she had sent troops to fight for the Union in the American Civil war?

And you do not seem to understand the importance of Moral leadership, military and governmental, to the morality of the troops.

Do most people view Nazi soldiers —that is, boots-on-the-ground troops, not leaders—as evil?

Besides US Troops arent fighting proxy wars with Russia at the moment.

In Europe you are more likely to have lightly if unarmed cops because its more acceptable to have troops with fully automatic weapons deployed.

That has made military planning massively more effective as generals can now see the real time location of both our troops and our enemy.

They used it to mop up less-equipped front of line troops.

Sure, but I don't buy that it would have happened without US troops to secure the country and to an extent the peace.

If populism is the focus, why not just do what the US always does and declare War on Space so you can send troops to look for space terrorists?

As the US/EU troops have closed down bases and have all but exited the country, many Hazara are looking to leave again due to the increasing prevalence of the Taliban.

The Enabling Act which gave Hitler absolute power was passed with a substantial number of legislators banned from participating, and the rest voted under explicit thread by armed Nazi troops.

So then, you would be okay with a military sending in troops with old, underpowered armaments because "it still works."

I take the exact same anecdotes and conclude, "Wow, black Americans are pretty resilient." >Federal troops withdrew from the South in 1877.

Wars are "expensive" in that they cost lots of money, but when america wages war the money that is spent in such great amounts is spent on American troops and government contractors, who in turn take the money they earned and spend it on other goods, so it does not "destroy" the money.