And sacking all the leadership that’s willing to push back.

But it’s probably all a testosterone issue…

Why did the US even have all that staff in the middle east if at the first sign of a fight they had to be evacuated ?

Its almost like an admission that all those people were unnecessary and not all battle trained or required.

I don't think it's possible to conduct a war with a policy of evacuating anywhere that the enemy might attack.

I think you fail to appreciate that both superpowers were not prepared for the war.

Russia assumed it would show up with a lot of tanks and soldiers and Ukraine would give up and let them walk in. America was the same, they assumed they would show up and Iran would also give up the next day.

In both cases its obvious both are not only arrogant and didnt study their opponent, but we can also see they are effectively a parade that shows and hopes the public and others believe far more about their capabilities. THey hope others scare themselves, because the reality is they are far less capable than what we thought before hand.

Before the Iran invasion i wondered for how long did the west know the USSR was not that strong because their reaction to the invasion was imho very limited. It seemed to me that JFK really reacted to the Russians during the missile crisis but in the modern equivalent with the Ukraine invasion, NATO itself did not do that much.

In both cases, RUssia and America tried to play poker... and lost.

they need a lot of indoor space to do stuff, anything realy, as it's often not a good place to be outside in the sun, and thr fabric covered buildings do last decades, but obviously not while bieng bombed, but the steel.buildings and quanset huts did't fair better, acomadation blocks held up a bit better, but again were obviously no longer useable. though your question about temporal suitability is still valid and might be best answered by the suggestion that they lasted longer then expected. many of the shots show huge concrete barriers that would stop ground attacks, but all of the footage shows that going OVER the conrete baricades was a tactic that was not considered sufficiently, and is the basis behind 'air superiority' a term that you might note, that has completly vannished from discussions along with it's former relevance. great eh!, we have now invented drone and hypersonic missle war fare that can be waged almost anywhere but is essentialy impossible to contain to a 'front' or 'zone', and so the morrons who invented all this "technology" are all turning to political controll of vital energy supplies to try and 'win' without a negotiating a peace treaty. the real issue is that drone and hypersonic missle weapons are bieng rapidly improved and ALL traditional military concepts of area command and control may suddenly become worthless. the only advantage the US has, is a guy at the top who can switch directions faster than his hat, 'end 17 wars', stop answering his phone and go play golf for the next two years as long as Switzerland gives him the nobel peace prize, followed by the nobel commisions anouncement of there long planned move to Bern now going forward.

> Let's see how the midterms play out.

Most likely the status quo will largely remain because the Democrats love to drop the ball near the end zone.

That's what happens when you vote for Banana Republicans.

Trump is the first caudillo-style president of the USA.