It's negative value, because you'd have tons of poor refugees. And it would cost massive billions to rebuild.

No.

The difference is the military can very quickly kill thousands of people per minute, without even going to the big stuff. Hand held guns are irrelevant.

Did you mean are punished?

That's not really accurate, the experience of an infantry soldier doing foot patrols in Afghanistan is completely different than someone who lived in a giant base in Iraq that had hiphop night and taco bell and never left it.

It's the system that produces a restricted rules of engagement and a general fear of punishment if you do something wildly out of line and a strong Management that induces discipline and restraint. If you take one crazy guy out of that system and then hand him a gun and tell him that he can do whatever he wants with full immunity then you don't get restraint.

He was popular and his excellent oratory skills induced people that liked him to like him more personally

The 2008 election was most Americans and while it wasn't solely about Iraq war it was resoundingly unpopular

In any context you always have a general 2:1 ratio of non combat support to active combat arms troops

They had taxes

There is also Those who hunt elves.

He says quite clearly that on earth his form is a lamb instead of a lion, and the last book is a straight eschaton.