Message from @Boo
Discord ID: 614170947209134080
But the part of the Pentagon that was hit was that department
There you go again. A baseless accusation with no proof. It's much more likely for it to be a terrorist attack fueled by dumb decisions than US profiting by losing resources in a long war
Your a sheeple boo
Sheep
Follows the heard
Losing resources?they got the opportunity to spread their army all over the war by the "war on terror" thing lol
Call me a sheep but it sounds dumb to say wars are profitable
Wars are profitable in every way you look at it
You a fuckint retarded they are profitable for some
In the modern world it's much easier to get what you want through other means
Are*
Assassinations?
Oh god you are so easily brainwashed by the internet that you don't look at it in a different angle
They make money off arms being sold
And i explained to you that you don't need an armed conflict to sell weapons
You think they are donated for free 😂
You sell more during war moron
if I got a weapon for 4 thousand and I can resell for 10 thousand damn right I'm going to make that money
More than that
You still sell more during war
you need conflict to test the weapons
You need conflict to show your arms are effective
You need conflict to show your combat superiority
Sure you could say that weapon manufacturers get more money by selling their weapons but lets look at it in a different way
You need conflict to retain your word as a political position
you need conflict for so many things
That there are more sides to this than arms factories
Give me ur side
Enlighten me
There is much more to be earned through trade in the free market than an armed conflict
Free market 😂 😂
So it would benefit one side but...
Not the others
In fact it might hurt their profits if two nations go to armed conflict
Bs
They will sell to both
Of course it does,the stronger country wins lol