21-Jan-17 World View -- President Trump's inauguration speech links today's America to the 1930s / The Gambia

Post a reply


This question is a means of preventing automated form submissions by spambots.
Smilies
:D :) ;) :( :o :shock: :? 8-) :lol: :x :P :oops: :cry: :evil: :twisted: :roll: :!: :?: :idea: :arrow: :| :mrgreen: :geek: :ugeek:

BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[flash] is OFF
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON

Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: 21-Jan-17 World View -- President Trump's inauguration speech links today's America to the 1930s / The Gambia

Re: 21-Jan-17 World View -- President Trump's inauguration speech links today's America to the 1930s / The Gambia

by Guest » Sat Feb 11, 2017 10:53 pm

John wrote: As you may know, I've gone back and forth on this issue.

The Chinese people have this "China Dream," where they completely
replace the US as the principal superpower in the world, with Chinese
navies controlling the seas from the Pacific Ocean to the Indian ocean
to Africa and the Mideast. It's a dream that's completely emotional,
erotic, nationalistic, self-delusional, irrational, unrealistic,
inappropriate, and disastrous.

China has no experience fighting an external war, and particularly no
experience fighting a naval war, and it takes decades of experience to
be able to fight such wars. China would have lost to Japan in WW II
if the US hadn't helped.

China will launch all its missiles at American cities, military bases,
and aircraft carriers. That will destroy many American cities, but it
won't destroy America.

In the meantime, China will be fighting Japan, Vietnam, India and
Russia, all with their own hordes of cannon fodder troops.
Furthermore, China will also be fighting a civil war. China does not
have any way of transporting millions of cannon fodder troops to the
US to fight the US army here. Unlike the US, they have no experience
fighting that kind of war, and don't know how to do it.

What the Chinese do have, or will have, is hundreds or perhaps even
thousands of nuclear missiles targeting American cities, military
bases, and aircraft carriers. After they've launched all those
missiles, and destroyed numerous American cities, bases, and aircraft
carriers, they'll have nothing left to fight the war against us, and
will still have to fight the war against India, Japan, and so forth.

At that point, it's quite possible that the US will join these
countries in delivering the final blow in the destruction of China's
military. Then there'll be a new international conference of
politicians to decide how to rebuild the world.

From a Chinese White Paper published in January 2017:

The Chinese people are working hard to realize the Chinese Dream…China will bring greater opportunities and benefits for development and cooperation in the Asia-Pacific region.”

And from the Chinese minister in charge of gold:

“For China, gold’s strategic mission is to support the internationalization of the renminbi and be a strong support for China’s goals of becoming an economic power and realizing the ‘Chinese Dream.’ Gold is the only product that holds properties of a commodity and currency; it’s the most trusty asset on which modern fiat currency can be based. From a historical perspective, gold has played an irreplaceable role in times of financial and geopolitical crises and in protecting a country’s economic security. It is this unique nature and function of gold that give it a glorious and holy role to play during the revitalization of the greatness of the Chinese people and the realization of the ‘Chinese Dream.’’ — Song Xin

And so it goes...

Re: 21-Jan-17 World View -- President Trump's inauguration speech links today's America to the 1930s / The Gambia

by Fishbellykanaka » Thu Jan 26, 2017 7:16 pm

Guest wrote:
Fishbellykanaka wrote:Aloha a me mahalo nui 'oe,.. a me, e pili mau na pomaika'i ia 'oe, bradduh! <shaka-fo-you!> :)
The time for talk is over. Way past. Whether you like it or not, war is upon us. Yeah, war is terrible, but submission is worse. I care about my country, my culture, my faith, and my people.
Submission is not an option, actually. You can't submit to that which accepts no submission.

I do actually agree with you, mostly. Our only real disagreement is how to use the time between now and "then". You'd like to make "then" arrive sooner, and I want to have as much time between now and "then" as possible so as to prepare.
Social justice warriors are already dead; they just don't know it. SJWs will die as they lived: pathetically. The scum bags the SJWs have protected will turn on them. I have already written them off. I don't care what happens to them.
"Social Justice" means nothing at all when "social" means survivalist, apocalyptic, conditions. Most of the unprepared will commit either active or passive suicide when "then" arrives.
Write your book, but I won't help you. I have neither the time for nor any interest in witty retorts and/or wry humor.
I'm not asking for your help, exactly. I just thought you would have, which I'm sure you do, some interesting commentary on what you thought I might have meant by what I said that you seemed to disagree with.

Humor is something that I'm sure you appreciate, as all non-PC folks have VERY good senses of humor. It's pretty clear that you're no exception. :)

I'm not your enemy, buck-O! The fiction written in the last several years, mostly in the sci-fi and fantasy genres, has been laying the "ground work" for what we will need and not need in the coming conflagration and aftermath.

Just as in the last several wars there have been no actual chariots, and very few hand-thrown javelins, on the "battlefields" of the next big war there will be no paratroopers and hand-to-hand skirmishes.

Everyone will fight where they are. Everywhere will be held by those who control the surrounding seven-ish mile radius territory. Groups of people either gladly work to assist in the preparation of the infrastructure necessary to bring the remaining nukes to their rightful destination (the central command and infrastructure coordinating the hordes), or they will be killed.

There will be no battlefields. There will be only killing fields. Places to die while throwing rocks at ICBMs, cruise missiles, and drones.

A soldier's work will be to command his drone-group, command his part of the factory, command his makers of food, and produce babies.

Everyone will be a soldier. Everyone will man the perimeter of the local.

Pity the soldiers far away on the borders of horde territory. Do not wish to be them.

When the drones of the enemy no longer come, and the horde territories are fenced in with borders uncrossable, then the real rebuilding can commence.

Be we will all be soldiers, manning the horde borders, mining the needed horde wastes, culling the horde aggressors, for four times four generations.

Re: 21-Jan-17 World View -- President Trump's inauguration speech links today's America to the 1930s / The Gambia

by Guest » Thu Jan 26, 2017 10:20 am

Fishbellykanaka wrote:Aloha a me mahalo nui 'oe,.. a me, e pili mau na pomaika'i ia 'oe, bradduh! <shaka-fo-you!> :)
The time for talk is over. Way past. Whether you like it or not, war is upon us. Yeah, war is terrible, but submission is worse. I care about my country, my culture, my faith, and my people.

Social justice warriors are already dead; they just don't know it. SJWs will die as they lived: pathetically. The scum bags the SJWs have protected will turn on them. I have already written them off. I don't care what happens to them.

Write your book, but I won't help you. I have neither the time for nor any interest in witty retorts and/or wry humor.

Re: 21-Jan-17 World View -- President Trump's inauguration speech links today's America to the 1930s / The Gambia

by Weiseth » Thu Jan 26, 2017 9:37 am

Guest wrote:
Weiseth wrote:
Me too man, it's about time we take retribution against the traitors.
That's what I am talking about.

I have fought in two wars. I'm ready for more.
Honor to you Brother,

I have not fought in any wars yet, would love to hear more about it, send me a pm if you want to befriend on fb/steam or something.

Though I'm in the Norwegian military, and for the last 12 years I participate in almost yearly military excercises With American and NATO troops, but my real enemy is not Russia, no they are our ally as they have given up the disastrous leftist notions of socialism and are embracing traditionalism.

The real enemy is the leftist within and their mohammedan allies. God Bless you, and may we both die for our countries With pride and as allies against the internal enemy.

Re: 21-Jan-17 World View -- President Trump's inauguration speech links today's America to the 1930s / The Gambia

by Fishbellykanaka » Wed Jan 25, 2017 11:41 pm

Guest wrote:
Fishbellykanaka wrote:
Guest wrote: To precipitate war, even by... blah blah blah....
Thank you, cuck.

It's bubble dwellers like you that have made the world a toilet. We have tried your way for the last 70 years, and where has it gotten us? Do not lecture people. I'm tired of empty comments parading as pithy ones that do nothing but ignore the reality of life for the majority. It's people like you that are the problem.

Do everyone a favor: Get out of the way.
I see that war can be just, and in fact usually somewhat healthy, as it partially rids humanity of those unthinking goofballs who see war as a video game.

Other than my conclusion that "Bring on the big war NOW!!" is not overly wise, what specifically do you disagree with in what I said?

Neither you, nor those you include in your "We", have "tried my way for the last 70 years".

I have no idea what "your way" is, but I'd LOVE to hear about it too. Do tell, please?

Re: 21-Jan-17 World View -- President Trump's inauguration speech links today's America to the 1930s / The Gambia

by Fishbellykanaka » Wed Jan 25, 2017 11:22 pm

Guest wrote:It's not evil to strike while you still can; while victory is still a possibility?
Victory is the conversion of the enemy to an impotent-enemy or a non-enemy. Enemy's are usually known to be enemies before they first strike. The question is when is the best time to preemptively strike the attempted first strike of a known enemy?

To use time before the enemy's decision to attack is certainly known is to NOT use that time to maximize your preemptive attack's planning and force.

To (even justifiably) preemptively strike the enemy too early is to appear to be a "First Striker".

To preemptively strike the enemy too late (if they ARE an actual enemy) means your death.

The age old question of war is not only about survival (vanquishing enemies), but also about sustaining society (not empowering enemies).

To preempt too soon is to make yourself an enemy to non-enemies. More enemies is bad.

To preempt too late is to die. Dying is bad.

The "least bad" course is to maximize your time to prepare, so as to be MOST prepared, by preemptively attacking as late as possible within the resolution of certainty of the enemy's decision to first attack.

This requires extremely keen senses, and massive power precisely focused.

You are correct, it's NOT evil to strike while you still can. It's necessary to strike while you still can. But to strike before it's most propitious to do so is to work against your own stated goals, and to create for yourself what you claim to battle against: Enemies.
You write fictional books. Have you fought in a war? Have you grown up in neighborhood that has been overrun with illegals and is now a dangerous place to live?

Evil? You don't know the definition of the word.
I wish I SOLD fictional books! I am working on that though. :)

I am not a soldier, nor have I ever been one. I am also not a samurai, or any sort of practical philosopher of war.

If you see any flaws in my thinking, please let me know about them.

"Evil" is the unnecessary creation of that which brings suffering to people.

Unjustly making war is evil, under this definition. Justly fighting the evil of unjust war-makers by making war on them is not evil. Criminally entering a country (or another's property) is an evil. Unjustly creating anxiety and/or danger is an evil.

I'm pretty sure I know what evil is.

Aloha a me mahalo nui 'oe,.. a me, e pili mau na pomaika'i ia 'oe, bradduh! <shaka-fo-you!> :)

Re: 21-Jan-17 World View -- President Trump's inauguration speech links today's America to the 1930s / The Gambia

by Guest » Wed Jan 25, 2017 10:44 pm

Fishbellykanaka wrote:
Guest wrote: To precipitate war, even by simply "wanting" it, is beyond stupid, and therefore evil, because it shortens the time for those who prepare for war to do so.

Only if the opponent's decision to initially strike is certainly known is it just to commence war, and then the preemptive action should be to strike the arm of the unmoving blade, and not the body wielding it.

..but if the blade moves, inflict overwhelming pain and death such as to make fear stay the opponent's allies will to war.

Thus is war just. Pre-pare and never des-pair.
Thank you, cuck.

It's bubble dwellers like you that have made the world a toilet. We have tried your way for the last 70 years, and where has it gotten us? Do not lecture people. I'm tired of empty comments parading as pithy ones that do nothing but ignore the reality of life for the majority. It's people like you that are the problem.

Do everyone a favor: Get out of the way.

Re: 21-Jan-17 World View -- President Trump's inauguration speech links today's America to the 1930s / The Gambia

by Guest » Wed Jan 25, 2017 9:21 pm

It's not evil to strike while you still can; while victory is still a possibility?

You write fictional books. Have you fought in a war? Have you grown up in neighborhood that has been overrun with illegals and is now a dangerous place to live?

Evil? You don't know the definition of the word.

Re: 21-Jan-17 World View -- President Trump's inauguration speech links today's America to the 1930s / The Gambia

by Fishbellykanaka » Wed Jan 25, 2017 8:41 pm

Guest wrote:
Weiseth wrote:
Me too man, it's about time we take retribution against the traitors.
That's what I am talking about.

I have fought in two wars. I'm ready for more.
To prepare for war is beyond admirable.

To wage just war is beyond courageous.

To precipitate war, even by simply "wanting" it, is beyond stupid, and therefore evil, because it shortens the time for those who prepare for war to do so.

Only if the opponent's decision to initially strike is certainly known is it just to commence war, and then the preemptive action should be to strike the arm of the unmoving blade, and not the body wielding it.

..but if the blade moves, inflict overwhelming pain and death such as to make fear stay the opponent's allies will to war.

Thus is war just. Pre-pare and never des-pair.

Re: 21-Jan-17 World View -- President Trump's inauguration speech links today's America to the 1930s / The Gambia

by Fishbellykanaka » Wed Jan 25, 2017 8:16 pm

Weiseth wrote:I dont know the future, I'm just postulating as well, but Europe is deeply polarized as it was before. And any conjecture needs to take that into account.
"Good times" (such as since "effective reconstruction of europe postWWII") produce "experiments in governance" like democratic socialism and it's variants. That shouldn't be a surprise, as "a comfortable household" tends to produce "spoiled insolent brats" that love to rebel simply "to rebel".

EVERYWHERE right now is "deeply polarized". That is blatantly obvious, and really only needs restating just to be oratorically thorough.

..or restated to make one's opponent look dimwitted by implying they don't realize that obvious fact. :)
As for Your other postulation it's very interesting the only other thing I would argue is that I'm not sure human rights would be the same in that scenario. The current human right or perspective on "humanity" comes from socialism and gnosticism, and the adherents to this philosophy is dying off and the leftists are taking it more to the Extreme into the realm of insanity and fantasy such as they argue now that every person has the right to government subsdized good housing, clothes and commodities. And that's not taking all the ludicrious notion of a pure clean energy economy into account.
I tend to agree with you,.. pretty much,.. I think. :)

Regardless of where the current "touchy-feely" Politically Correct tyrannically applied version of "Human Rights" theory comes from, the fact is that "high-risk subsistence-level survivalist" conditions will always produce "Zombie Apocalypse" mode "human rights" theory and practice.

Now, that doesn't mean that ANYONE should actively encourage the freakin' apocalyse, simply because that is the act of someone who has already devalued their own life's value rather drastically, and nobody likes to see that kind of desperation (ie DESPAIR, hopelessness) from anyone.

Reacting appropriately DURING the zombie apocalypse is one thing, and an admirable thing, but actively willing such a condition on the planet (humanity) is not to be admired.

..and, YES, the comicbook physics of "Pure and Clean Unlimited Lemony Fresh Energy" is rather delusional. :)
As Mr Xenakis said, I hope to read Your work as well, very interesting. The hordes and Warlords reminds me of the aftermath of the dark age of Technology in the 40K universe.
Damned Orcs..!! Let's hope the great wave of bio-mutation that would follow massive nuclear war doesn't result in any damned Orcs. Mostly due to the fact that if there are Orcs, there HAVE to be Eldar (Elves), and the "Annoyance of the Elves" would be utterly intolerable.

Top