posted by O-Trap
Well, in the event that it was discussed with others that personal reasons fueled such actions, then sure. It wouldn't exactly require a ton of people to know the motivation for why the president would give the go-ahead for such action.
I'm not saying I buy it. Just that it doesn't really take a full blown conspiracy to think a president, with his ability to unilaterally approve a military attack, might do so with something other than self-serving motives.
And if he would do so for self-serving motives, why would it be a stretch for it to be as a distraction?
What you have described would require the ability to read minds. Its an impossible to discern hypothetical.
I would argue offensive military action is far more unlikely and politically difficult during domestic turmoil. The POTUS is weakened. Its just too risky it doesn't distract it draws attention. The POTUS unilaterally approves a military attack he does not unilaterally create it.
A situation warranting a possible military response would have to be planned and hold the support of many on the national security team and materialize during domestic turmoil. Boogie used the term "magically" to describe opportunities for these types of missile strikes. That term leans my mind toward an orchestrated illusion for action. Which would necessitate conspirators.
Your hypothetical leans to selfish human nature in weighing options presented. Plausible but not conspiratorial as the latter would take more than one. Like I said impossible to discern.