Lol ambition set against ambition is based on theoretical assumptions.
no. it was written into the structure of the govt. its even somewhat inevitable. no sooner had the ink dried on the constitution did factions form in the govt., that had very different aims and goals. many were self serving, and many were not.
Government has also changed a lot since the time they founded the State and the presidency (not to mention the Federal Reserve) has dramatically grown in power.
this is true, but "the govt" is still not a monolith. its factionalized.
Sure, different factions, but they are single minded when it comes to national and global interests.
national and global interests? so.......everything? or are galactic interests different?
how can you admit that there are different factions, an simultaneously seem to claim that they agree on everything? they dont, and never have.
The means of attaining those interests might differ, but public and private persuasion and "popularity" are variables too.
oh yes, but they dont even agree or align on many of the self serving issues. one cannot be bought, by both facebook and google for example. one cannot be backed by the NRA, AND gun control advocates.
It's not so black and white as you picture it.
what? im the one claiming that the govt is full of shades of gray. as i see it, youre the one claiming that its all black or white.
Why didn't we attack the Soviets? Because Kennedy was an inexperienced little kid and he was soft. Then he got murdered and this country was run by hardline warhawks.
so different factions, goals, and interests then? why did the false flags of the OP never come to fruition?
kennedy listened to these guys with the bay of pigs invasion, and we know how that went. another interpretation of him ignoring them on the soviet attack during the cuban missile crisis, is that he was finally coming into his own and being a confident leader.