Final answer:
The "senior squad" would likely use their legislative power to stop the funding for war supplies. This is grounded in historical examples where Congress cut funds to cease military interventions in undeclared wars and is part of the broader 'guns versus butter' debate.
Step-by-step explanation:
The "senior squad" likely refers to senior members of a governing body, such as Congress, who have the authority to cease funding for war supplies. In historical contexts, such actions are part of checks and balances where the legislative branch can influence or control military actions, often as a reaction to conflicts considered to be unjust, unpopular, or undeclared.
For instance, Congress has the power to react against undeclared wars by cutting funds for military interventions, even though such efforts are often time-consuming and may come into effect long after the initial military action. This is evidenced by historical instances like the prevention of military intervention in Southeast Asia during the collapse of South Vietnam in 1975 and the accelerated withdrawal of American troops from Lebanon in the mid-1980s and Somalia in 1993.
These actions relate to the broader discussion often referred to as the "guns versus butter" debate, which highlights the choice governments face between allocating financial resources to the military or to social programs. This debate is indicative of public opinion that may be divided over how to prioritize national budget spending.