You'll note nowhere on that list of synonyms are terms used for militaries. That's not by accident. It's because national militaries aren't terrorist groups.
Peaty
joined 2 years ago
AH won't be replicated here. It isn't large enough.
4chan's /a/ board isn't good anymore? ;)
Ok but your example is the reverse situation where the Israelis are training American police after the US police crossed too many lines. So this isn't an example of the US training Israel to be more brutal but rather the Israelis theoretically training them to be less.
First you didn't not include a definition. Second, dictionaries aren't authoritative sources but rather descriptive ones. If you need that explained to you then you are ill equipped for any academic discussion.
I thought it would be clear that the National Board of Economic advisors wouldn't be working fir all nations.
The NBER declares recessions for the USA and they did not do so due to employment stats. The literature regarding this has been very clear about this point.
No we were an invading army
Yang's issue is he flipped the tax funded UBI and deficit funded UBI's growth numbers. There is almost no growth from UBI unless it is money falling from the sky.
I'll dig it up later but I suspect you have that backwards. As I recall the tax funded UBI produces little to no growth so it shouldn't cover inflation
Lol ok buddy. Tell us more about your complete lack of understanding of what science is.
Except they are. Terrorists are non-state organizations.
There is also ones for other languages.
Regardless the point is a dictionary does not define words but rather describes how they are used. Even if it covered national militaries, which it does not, it wouldn't support your claim. In fact it would be an "appeal to authority"