No crisis here.

Instapundit host Glenn Reynolds has a great line:

I’ll believe it’s a crisis when the people who tell me it’s a crisis act like it’s a crisis.

I would apply this same line to Stephen Green’s recent Instapundit entry:

THE PRICE OF WAR, NEGLECT, DOWNSIZING, AND A BROKEN PROCUREMENT SYSTEM: House Panel says $1 Trillion Needed to Reboot Military.

It was just over a year ago that the Republican lead House Armed Services Committee telegraphed its readiness to pretend that trans-gendered soldiers, airmen, sailors, and marines would make our military stronger.  The Senate Republicans and the Admirals and Generals fell in line as well.  We saw the same with women in combat.  All of our civilian and military leadership is telling us that we have no significant military threats, and therefore we can stop focusing on fielding warriors and get on with the business of fielding Social Justice Warriors.  I’m inclined to take them at their word.

Besides, we just completed a massively expensive SJW reboot;  surely that should hold us over for a few years.

This entry was posted in Instapundit, Military, Social Justice Warriors, Traditional Conservatives. Bookmark the permalink.

132 Responses to No crisis here.

  1. Pingback: No crisis here. | Aus-Alt-Right

  2. Avraham rosenblum says:

    The US military is just another affirmative action program to promote unqualified people to positions of power..

  3. The USA Empire doesn’t get into wars with serious rivals, like Russia, or China, or even a barely second-rate power like Iran. All the US Empire does is bully third and forth tier states like Syria, or another of Israel’s enemies-du-jour.

    Most of the military is a jobs program. The actual fighters – the people who shoot and kill – are men, as usual, and the SF types tend to be heavily, er, “traditional American men.”

    However, the idea that the US Empire’s military is underfunded is nothing but the squawking of corporate welfare leeches. Most of the Empire’s military spending is pure pork.

    http://johntreed.com/blogs/john-t-reed-s-blog-about-military-matters/65448643-are-u-s-navy-surface-ships-sitting-ducks-to-enemies-with-modern-weapons

    The US Empire has more nuclear weapons than anybody. The Empire spends more money on the military than the next few countries combined. The US is the only super-power on earth.

    Yet some lobbyists from Northrop Grumman start belly-aching about how their bonuses didn’t go up as fast this year, and the Republican comfort women (i.e., the GOP Congress) starts whining about how the Democrats/liberals “gutted the military.”

    The only thing that’s surprising is that people still fall for it.

  4. Matt says:

    Every time i read something about our military, I can’t help but consider the future headline: “Canada Annexes Northern States, Virginia To Utah Now Northern American Border.”

    Our soldiers may be game, and have the will to fight, but the organization as a whole is rotten at the core. One good hammer blow in the right place could shatter America’s will and ability to project force.

  5. Cane Caldo says:

    @HR

    Republican comfort women (i.e., the GOP Congress)

    LOL!

  6. greyghost says:

    How motivated would a man be to fight for america in the first place. Think about all of the things we have discussed here over the years and think of sacrificing your life and killing to keep those making the topic of discussion safe and in power. Then turn on the TV, radio or open a newspaper and see them talk about how racist,sexist and homophobic they are with their privilege.

  7. anna26 says:

    I know I’m changing the subject, but there’s another crisis:

    “This Guy Gets Paid to Cuddle Strangers”

    How lonely have we become?

  8. Oscar says:

    @ Matt says:
    September 23, 2016 at 2:12 pm

    “Our soldiers may be game, and have the will to fight… ”

    Not for long, and that’s a feature, not a bug.

  9. feeriker says:

    The only thing that’s surprising is that people still fall for it.

    Not surprising at all if you attend an evangelical church or come from a family or community that votes straight-ticket Republican. These are the people P.T. Barnum had in mind…

  10. greyghost says:

    Feeiker
    They fall for it because the truth of reality is far too horrifying. Military power has been associated with money and resources. The generals are fill of S*** with this money thing knowing full well social engineering is weakening the force. To keep their positions in the empire that is the last thing to be spoken about even though that is where the money is going. Even the defense industry is in on the game and can’t develop any weapons for less than a trillion. (f-35) Most of the military hardware we have was developed in the seventies and earlier.

  11. Gunner Q says:

    Another $1T in Federal spending? Sure, why not. The first $20T of debt was scary but now that we’re on to the second $20T, eh, whatever. I wonder how much of that pork I can grab in return for keeping a thermos of servicewoman eggs in a rented freezer.

    Remind me why I pay taxes when the gov’t will spend the money anyway? And spend the money on non-taxpayers, no less.

  12. DrTorch says:

    When I read about the utter failures that are the F35 and the LCS, I would agree, the military needs a reboot. And $1T isn’t nearly enough.

    However, the secular US has put their faith in technology, overtly rejecting Providence. It is no coincidence that these failures have occurred, and no amount of money and technology will ever be enough to shield from God’s wrath, or even His smirking indifference.

  13. Send the freaks to the front-lines.

    They worship death anyway.

  14. The Jack Russell Terrorist says:

    President Eisenhower warned about the military industrial complex in his January 17, 1961 farewell speech. This is only part of it and is only 2:30 long. At 1:30 is where he warns of misplaced power and the military industrial complex. What he warned would happen if allowed has come to pass.

  15. Anonymous Reader says:

    Dalrock, as I’m sure you are aware the Chinese did not allow Ballbusters to be shown in their country. So that particular SJW reboot has been rejected by the Great Firewall. That alone is justification for a full military reboot. Because if China can reject a movie with four feminists, three women and one of them a black man, with impunity then who knows what they will do next?

    Clearly the DOD reboot must include Hollywood, because of the strategic importance of the next Ballbusters movie that might not be made otherwise if the Chinese buy Tinseltown!

    https://variety.com/2016/film/news/wanda-lawmakers-raise-questions-about-chinese-investment-in-hollywood-1201868250/

  16. Pingback: No crisis here. | Reaction Times

  17. Oscar says:

    I fear that the only thing that’ll stop America’s self-imposed military decline is an actual crisis caused by loosing a major war.

  18. Gunner Q, may I suggest a warm rented freezer. We need to nip this sort of thing in the bud, and we all no that “mistakes” are made.

  19. adam says:

    I drive by the pentagon every day to work and what astounds me are the number of boobs and skinny arms (women) that wear the uniform (they just LOOK weaker) and the exorbitant number of foreign luxury cars in the parking lot.

  20. feeriker says:

    I drive by the pentagon every day to work and what astounds me are the number of boobs and skinny arms (women) that wear the uniform (they just LOOK weaker) and the exorbitant number of foreign luxury cars in the parking lot.

    Just remember that the Pentagon is a bureaucrat asylum, that the majority of the inmates are career REMF-POGs (Rear-Echelon MotherF***ers – People Other Than Grunts) and presents a rather atypical picture of the current force. Having done my fair share of business there in my past lives, both while on active duty and as a contractor, I can assure you that anybody on active duty worth the uniform they wear tries to avoid the place at all costs.

  21. Casey says:

    Agree with Dalrock

    I’ll believe there is a crisis when the people who tell me it’s a crisis, ACT like it’s a crisis.
    In the meantime fellas, stop enlisting in a completely corrupt, and morally bankrupt institution.

    Let the crisis come to those who embrace SJW nonsense.

  22. tweell says:

    Ah, but that extra money is needed for new wonder weaponry that keeps those women and trans types from having to actually pick up a weapon and fight.

    That and more PowerPoint. Can’t have enough PowerPoint presentations.

  23. jsolbakken says:

    Does anyone still doubt that there is a conspiracy to subsume the United States under the control of a global government? They push the SJW BS for the precise purpose of provoking contempt and hatred and disgust for our own country. No normal decent human being would die for a POS degenerate deviant pile of crap like what the USA has become at this point.

  24. Avraham rosenblum says:

    global government-that was the point of Stephanie Meir [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Axyy2RZ7RoA]-that this is a conspiracy tarting from the Fabian Society and onward to the Frankfurt school etc.

  25. They Call Me Tom says:

    The US has been the world’s military, so when global government tries to take charge, and the majority of the military stand against it… how can they possibly succeed? I’m just curious why something hasn’t happened among active military personnel already, there aren’t many more straws to break.

    In the mean time, I ordered a couple AR15 lowers earlier this month. And apparently several other folks in California have as well (there’s a long wait list, that luckily I’m pretty close to the front of). If Californians are arming up, I can only imagine how much the free states are arming up.

  26. Dave says:

    Does anyone still doubt that there is a conspiracy to subsume the United States under the control of a global government?…

    The elites know exactly what they are doing. America may yet be the most difficult country to bring under the powers of the One World government……but….
    Unfortunately, looking back from the vantage point of prophecy, the globalists succeeded. By the time the antichrist showed up on the scene, and the Great Tribulation ensued, America had ceased to be a superpower that had any significant influence on world affairs. The center of world action had moved from the West.

  27. They Call Me Tom says:

    That probably would be the best strategy for a global government, to nevermind the US as it disengages from the rest of the world and fields a politically correct but ineffective force, and take advantage everywhere as the US vacates. The question is, Russia and China have flexed a little military power (Ukraine and South China Sea respectively), but is there any military in existence right now that can truly subdue the world once the US steps away? I can see how the economic manipulations can work for a little while, but such manipulations have a limited duration of effectiveness, people stop believing in a currency’s real value if it fluctuates too much… the shell game becomes obvious too quickly for long term control over large numbers of people.

    If I were forecasting… I’d predict some variation of feudalism being the outcome of the world’s current course. Small forces, with small vicinities of influence, lower quality of living for people in general… more common occurrence of violence and conflict, at smaller scales, but that add up to larger numbers of lives lost than what most in the west have seen for the last five decades. Not sure how quickly we get there… technology makes things happen faster, but at the same time, the technology is degraded as a result along the way… so there would be some deceleration as society falls off the cliff.

  28. Anon says:

    All government spending should be cut in half. ALL, including military, entitlement programs, everything. Since we spend 115-125% of taxes collected, this can be a balanced budget with a ~40% tax cut as well.

    Sure, a lot of pigs will be cut off from the trough. But most government spending is a transfer from men to women anyway.

    This is politically impossible, of course. This is why democracy always devolves into a gyno-cult over time.

  29. greyghost says:

    There is not going to be a world government. The western countries are the ones wanting it and to pull it off on their own people they have to fully emasculate their men. Such men are in no position to subjugate the world with chinese ,russians and arabs to one world rule. hell the Arabs voted in and welcomed by european women are raping and kicking their asses right now and are on the path to running with the men there standing by and taking it or supplicating the women to make sure they are happy. All paid for by the Europeans themselves.
    The real threat is the emasculation of the men with the ability to stop this.(men that will fight and kill for their freedom and beliefs) After that it fails and so does the nice cushy first world country with only weak emasculated cucks to keep the lights on. BTW the women will just go with the studs coming in kicking ass they have no loyalty to nations or values don’t even have the capacity and never did.

  30. Micha Elyi says:

    Many complain about the Republicans in Congress. Few have their backs.

  31. Anon says:

    Many complain about the Republicans in Congress. Few have their backs.

    Some Republicans in the House (almost none in the Senate) are the real deal. But most are cuckservatives. No elected official can take an anti-misandry position.

  32. Anon says:

    Micha Elyi,

    When will you accept that most high-level GOP officeholders are cuckservatives, who are so keen on begging for female approval that they will support any and all leftism that is packaged as ‘chivalry’?

  33. Boxer says:

    Some Republicans in the House (almost none in the Senate) are the real deal. But most are cuckservatives.

    That’s right. Let’s remember that VAWA 2013 (which doesn’t sunset until 2018) was sponsored and pushed through by Mike Crapo, ultraconservative R from the reddest of all red states, Idaho.

    That in itself ought to lead people (even non-religious ones, like me) to the biblical conclusions about putting one’s faith in secular powers. The Republican party is not your friend. In fact, it’s proven to be a much more dangerous hive of degeneracy than shitlibs. When liberals like (Mormon) Harry Reid and (Catholic) Nancy Pelosi are asked, they’ll at least tell me the truth, to my face, that they hate men, love abortion, and want to expand no-fault divorce and other harmful stuff.

  34. feeriker says:

    That in itself ought to lead people (even non-religious ones, like me) to the biblical conclusions about putting one’s faith in secular powers. The Republican party is not your friend. In fact, it’s proven to be a much more dangerous hive of degeneracy than shitlibs.

    Yep. This is another thing that can’t be driven through the thick-but-oh-so-empty skulls of American evangelicals. Four-plus decades of betrayal by Republicans of everything they believe in, and after the same stale, broken promises and yet they still line up every election day to vote the same, amoral, backstabbing douchebags into office who barely disguise their dismissive contempt for them. Albert Einstein called that “insanity.” I call it “mental retardation.”

    Lenin’s Useful Idiots, emphasis on the “Idiots” part.

  35. Anon says:

    Four-plus decades of betrayal by Republicans of everything they believe in, and after the same stale, broken promises and yet they still line up every election day to vote the same, amoral, backstabbing douchebags into office who barely disguise their dismissive contempt for them.

    What really exposed the cuckservatives is that despite the fact that Trump is hated by the left even more than GWB, they still cling to their ‘never Trump’ stupidity, somehow not realizing that the only other choice is Hillary.

    Whatever Trump’s flaws, and assuming he actually wants to win, the fact that the left is absolutely terrified of him *alone* is reason enough to vote for him (i.e. vote against Hillary).

    But cuckservatives are so clueless about politics that they still think that their impotent ‘staying at home’ is somehow noticed by anyone but them. Micha Elyi still can’t figure out that the GOP is at least as bad, if not worse, on misandry, than Democrats, and there is not path out of socialism without an eradication of misandry..

  36. Don Quixote says:

    greyghost says:
    September 24, 2016 at 4:02 pm

    There is not going to be a world government. The western countries are the ones wanting it and to pull it off on their own people they have to fully emasculate their men. Such men are in no position to subjugate the world with chinese ,russians and arabs to one world rule. hell the Arabs voted in and welcomed by european women are raping and kicking their asses right now and are on the path to running with the men there standing by and taking it or supplicating the women to make sure they are happy. All paid for by the Europeans themselves.

    I have to disagree. Please allow me to share some of my craziness. The empire of Iron and Clay represents west and east respectively. It will eventuate.

    The real threat is the emasculation of the men with the ability to stop this.(men that will fight and kill for their freedom and beliefs) After that it fails and so does the nice cushy first world country with only weak emasculated cucks to keep the lights on.

    Those pushing for world government will succeed, they will create the necessary laws to rid themselves of opposition. State enforced atheism will ensure religious fanatics [those prepared to die for their beliefs] are removed. Anyone who has been radicalised [Islam or Christian] will be a threat to the world government. Im sure they can think up a law to solve that problem.

    BTW the women will just go with the studs coming in kicking ass they have no loyalty to nations or values don’t even have the capacity and never did.

    Those in power don’t give it up without a fight. The state already has an alternative model to marriage. Im sure the plan is to retain the advances made by feminism and build it into an beastly alternative for state ‘marriage’. I could be wrong…

  37. They Call Me Tom says:

    Just as a law with selective enforcement doesn’t actually exist as a law…so too does a law cease to exist if only few are willing to enforce it. The things that are needed for an all-powerful global government to come into power will take force do back up the words on paper, and I think in the end, military will side against global government for the most part. Doesn’t mean that there won’t be an attempt… I just don’t see global government being successful until there’s another military power out there to be their strong man.

  38. Spike says:

    Wait a minute: Wasn’t the aim of including gays, women and the transgendered instituted in order to get the “best possible pool of talent”?
    Wouldn’t that “best pool of talent” make the military more efficient by definition?
    If it is more efficient, why does it need a TRILLION DOLLAR reboot?

  39. Otto Lamp says:

    “greyghost There is not going to be a world government. The western countries are the ones wanting it and to pull it off on their own people they have to fully emasculate their men. Such men are in no position to subjugate the world…”

    There is one end times theory that one world government will be a Muslim government.

    I never understood how you could have Muslim rule over what was the remains of the old Roman empire (namely Europe)…till this year when they started letting Muslim refugees in by the millions. Those refugees will reproduce at high rates (much higher than Christians, which don’t even reproduce at replacement rates) and in a couple of generations Islam be the dominant culture in Europe. IMHO, unless they kick the out–now, it is already a done deal.

    The theory is interesting, because some Muslim end times stories seem to be a mirror image of Christian end times.

    Christian version: a strong leader (anti-Christ) emerges and takes political control; a false prophet arises and points to a false religion; those that refuse to follow the anti-christ and false religion are beheaded.

    Muslim version: there will be a strong Muslim leader who will take political control; Jesus will return, say he is only a prophet, and point to the Muslim leader as the true prophet to follow; Islam will become the worldwide religion; those that refuse to follow Islam will be beheaded.

    The Muslim Jesus maps to the false prophet, the Muslim leader to the anti-christ, and Islam to the false religion. Both versions predict that those that refuse to accept the false religion and political leader will be beheaded.

    I’m not saying this is it. I don’t know, but I think it’s an option we should keep our eyes out for.

  40. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Just saw The Architect on Showtime, a movie starring Parker Posey. The film was a perfect example of the FI.

    Posey is a frustrated housewife/artist, married to a Beta Nice Guy, who’s financially smart, hardworking, but boring. Plus Posey feels he’s “controlling” and that she’s “suffocating” in the marriage.

    They hire a sleazy Alpha Architect. Posey has a one night stand with him, and gets pregnant. She hides that it’s his baby. The husband thinks it’s his.

    But pregnant Posey walks out on her husband because he’s so stifling. She plans to be a Strong, Independent Woman. Posey discovers the Alpha Architect lied about his professional creds, so she destroys his career by painting his building right before a magazine is set to photograph it.

    Posey becomes famous and celebrated, because her painting is so brilliant. She returns to her Nice Guy husband. Only now, Posey is in charge. She’s a brilliant artist and chief breadwinner. Her husband, who never stopped adoring Posey, now manages her career, while unknowingly raising the Alpha’s baby.

    The film depicts Posey as the heroine. It suggests that she rightfully rebelled against her stifling husband, asserting her independence. This resulted in her achieving her rightful artistic success, and demoting her husband to helpmeet. Posey even won the battle of naming the baby. So Posey enjoyed her Alpha Fux, ditched him, and has her Beta Helpmeet raise the baby. (Posey is the Bux, she being so strong and independent.)

    Posey is not depicted as having done anything immoral. The Alpha Architect was immoral for using and lying to Posey. The Beta Hubby was wrong for stifling and suffocating Posey. But after she asserted her strength, independence, and creativity, everything turned out well for her. The Alpha lost his career, and the Beta is now orbiting Posey.

  41. @RPL:

    Just to top it off, her name is “Drew”. Someone signal Rollo. He’s going to have a ball with this one.

  42. Anonymous Reader says:

    Red Pill Latecomer, that’s covert hypergamy, but also AF – Beta Cucks. One of Rollo Tomassi’s topics in the last year or so. Open hypergamy would be the same story, only she admits the child is Architects and Beta Husband agrees to raise it anyway. Once I would have found such a plot ridiculous. Once I didn’t have a pair of Glasses to see through.

    Spike – it should be obvious that the diversity of homosexuals, transvestites, etc. just hasn’t had enough time to work its magic on DOD yet, so clearly more money is needed. Because more money is always needed by government.

  43. greyghost says:

    Otto Lamp
    It makes sense. Islam will be the world government not some western progressive elitist for the reasons I have described. Outside of the debate on scripture this is what it looks like in Europe. (crass CH article)
    https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2016/09/22/men-invade-women-invite-into-their-vaginas/
    Western men need to spend a whole lot less time pleasing women. The arabs don’t and the women love them for it.

  44. Spike says:

    Anonymous Reader says:
    September 25, 2016 at 5:29 pm

    Spike – it should be obvious that the diversity of homosexuals, transvestites, etc. just hasn’t had enough time to work its magic on DOD yet, so clearly more money is needed. Because more money is always needed by government.

    Thanks for that, AR. Logic failed me there. Of course the magic hasn’t worked its’way in yet. How could I have been so blind, for so long?

  45. tsotha says:

    The US military is just another affirmative action program to promote unqualified people to positions of power..

    It’s pretty normal for the leadership of a peace-time military to degrade. “Damn the torpedoes” types get replaced by chair polishers and bean counters, because that’s what gets you promoted when there’s no war (and no, we are not at war).

    But the Obama administration, more than any other since WW II has made a habit of prizing political loyalty over competence. That’s how you end up with a military that a) you can’t trust and b) can’t win wars.

  46. Anon says:

    If the military were run the way any private sector enterprise would be forced to run, we could get the same level of defense for half the cost. Just like the market cap per employee of S&P500 companies has risen over time.

    But since a lot of it is pork, that has not happened. Military spending still rose even under Obama. You would think a leftist with many anti-US supporters would cut military spending. But no, all spending is good spending, for a leftist.

  47. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    What’s really disgusting and ominous about films like The Architect is that the story really isn’t even “about” the infidelity. The story is about the wacky, pretentious architect who upsets this house-hunting couple’s lives.

    The infidelity is incidental to the story. Like it’s no big deal. Just something that happened along the way. Like it’s all normal, understandable behavior. Only a bigoted, religious fanatic, highly judgemental person would even think to call out the character on it.

    Posey similarly cuckolds her finance in Price Check: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1845849/?ref_=nm_flmg_act_24 He is ignorant in the end, happily raising another man’s baby.

    In One Hot Summer http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1422201/?ref_=fn_al_tt_2 — a high-powered female attorney (played by Vanessa Marcil) cheats on her Beta husband attorney, partially because he’s a suffocating conservative who wants Marcil to quit her job and have babies. Marcil fux with a really Nice Alpha attorney, her original, passionate love back in law school. Marcil is an Alpha Widow to this Alpha attorney.

    In the end, Marcil goes back to her Beta husband, who stays home to raise the kid (which might not be his). The Beta husband down-sizes his attorney job to work from home, so Marcil can pursue her more successful attorney career. This is depicted as fair, because he’s the one who wanted kids so much. Marcil checks in on Skype from her high-powered office, to watch her husband, with the help of Marcil’s mother, change diapers.

    The Alpha attorney forgives Marcil for leaving him, and even offers her free help on her case before he leaves her for good, graciously departing from Marcil’s life when she no longer wants him.

    These films are all marketed to women. Some are produced by Hallmark, once a “family friendly” producer. They’re everywhere. And these cheating women are all depicted as moral, decent women, whose Beta husbands stifled them, thus forcing them into justifiable affairs.

    Message: Men who stifle or denigrate their brilliant wives’ career aspirations deserve to be cheated on. And the men are lucky if the wife returns home, and lets him raise the baby (do NOT ask whose it is) while she pursues her brilliant career.

  48. Kevin says:

    Unfortunately to these people, they are acting as if it is a crisis. I wish that they were just indulging their insane theories of sexual deviance knowing that they were tearing down the military but I suspect it is much worse. These idiots actually believe women and the transgendered make the military “stronger” despite all evidence and reality. They are true believers. They will never stop.

  49. Lyn87 says:

    A note on Arab women lapping up the antics of Arab men.

    It’s not really true.

    As I noted a couple of weeks ago when I made my re-appearance, I recently returned from a year in the Middle East. The women under sharia don’t like it one bit (even the Arab women), except for the relatively small percentage of them that are “True Believers”. Just like in the “Christian” West, the “Muslim” Middle East is mostly made up of people who are religious in name only. But Muslim countries have the same problem the Soviet Union had: Western media gets in, and they now see that most of the rest of the world doesn’t live like they do (I had over 800 channels on T.V., which is the standard package there). They can also easily travel to places where sharia is not enforced, and when they do, it’s off to the races. As for the men: they tend toward two types: brutes and pussies – with the pussies being the vast majority – and the women don’t much like either. The idea that Arab/Muslim men are “alpha” in the way we use the term in the man-o-sphere is a myth. Western contractors are considered far superior to their fat, inbred countrymen, although the girls who play that game will obey their fathers and marry one of their cousins after they’ve been banged-out by Western ex-pats. (No: I’m not kidding about marrying cousins.)

    Women are women even in a Muslim sandbox – they still have a hook-up culture (because young women want to exercise their sexual power while they can), but they just have to be a lot more discreet than American or European college chicks. Truly… for some of them it’s like a game to see how much they can get away with.

    Anyway, I’m in my mid-50’s, and I was in a mall with a friend of mine about the same age. We’re both retired military officers and in pretty good shape (Westerners tend to be fat, but the rest of the world is rapidly gaining), so a couple of in-shape Western dudes (which also means we make good money in that market) are a hot commodity. Age differences are not a big deal there, and two Arab women young enough to be our daughters tried to pick us up right in the mall. We’re both married so we didn’t let them, but there’s a system for that sort of thing: we can’t be seen talking in public for more than a few moments, so the protocol is that we would have exchanged business cards, then we would call to set up a bang-a-thon at our compound later – preferably with lots of contraband. I should stress that these weren’t poor third-world gold-diggers – these were at least middle-class native women trying to get their freak on with a couple of white dudes who presumably have access to alcohol. They weren’t looking for love – or even a Green Card – they were looking to PAR-TAY. Typically women like that would be available for NSA sex on tap (you won’t be going on dates, but they’ll take a cab right to your door), or as girlfriends if you’re so inclined, or pretty much any arrangement you want (including bringing their friends to join in), and if any particular girl stops pleasing you, getting a new one is as easy as swiping right on Tinder or hanging out in a mall with a pocket full of business cards. Any American who wanted to spin plates could do so all he wanted… what happens on the compounds stays on the compounds (if you get caught doing any of that outside the walls of the Western compounds you’re going to be on the next jet out, though).

    The point is that just because they have more social controls than we do does not mean that the young women don’t still try to work the AF/BB angle, and they prefer gregarious Western ex-pats to the aloof guys in the man-dresses they’re eventually going to enter into arranged marriages to. Unlike native men, we Westerners have interacted with females all our lives, and we simply know how to treat women better than the men there do. (To be fair, a bunch of ex-pat American combat veterans are going to have much higher average T-level than a bunch of guys in man-dresses with poor hygiene who may never have spoken to a woman outside of immediate family.)

  50. Boxer says:

    Lyn87:

    Thanks for this. It’s sad to think that even strictly-raised Muslim girls are tending toward slutty antics. I mean, if any type of woman would be more likely to love God and be obedient to manly headship, one would assume it’d be a nice Muslim girl.

    Women are women even in a Muslim sandbox – they still have a hook-up culture (because young women want to exercise their sexual power while they can), but they just have to be a lot more discreet than American or European college chicks. Truly… for some of them it’s like a game to see how much they can get away with.

    This is actually a very common phenomenon among Muslim-American immigrants. Granted, the girls one meets in masjid pay a little bit more lip service to patriarchy, and are slightly more obedient, but mostly it’s just a lot of chickie theater. In actuality, Muslim girls are even more willing to ho’ it up than Christian or secular girls. A few years ago I got passed around by tons of Muslim chicks and none of them were virgins.

    One thing that even shocked me: there are some Muslim girls in the town I used to live in who would wear hijab, while showing tons of cleavage and wearing yoga pants and such. I don’t know exactly how this is justified, but it was more than one young lady who was doing that.

    Muslims need to take action now before their faith community goes down to the same matriarchal hell that Protestants fell into twenty years ago. If they don’t, they’re going to be in a lot of trouble.

    Boxer

  51. infowarrior1 says:

    ”. As for the men: they tend toward two types: brutes and pussies – with the pussies being the vast majority – and the women don’t much like either. ”

    Competent patriarchal leadership is a good balance between the 2 just like Jesus himself the perfect man.

    Not easy to teach and train but required.

  52. Boxer says:

    Dear Oscar:

    One one hand, it’s fair to assume that if freakin’ Brad Pitt can’t successfully manage a marriage and family, the average Joe has zero chance.

    On the other, these people are clearly deranged. They have, like, half a dozen kids, a couple adopted from various different countries. While I hope that the charges aren’t true, I wouldn’t argue that the kids are probably better off away from their parents, who seem completely detached from everyday reality.

    Boxer

  53. PokeSalad says:

    They have, like, half a dozen kids, a couple adopted from various different countries.

    The Virtue-Signaler’s Starter Pack.

  54. Oscar says:

    @ Boxer says:
    September 26, 2016 at 9:12 am

    “One one hand, it’s fair to assume that if freakin’ Brad Pitt can’t successfully manage a marriage and family, the average Joe has zero chance.”

    I was thinking along that line.

    “On the other, these people are clearly deranged. They have, like, half a dozen kids, a couple adopted from various different countries.”

    I have nine kids. Five adopted from Ethiopia. Yeah, I know, not the same thing, considering that Angelina Jolie has said some really weird things about their kids, but then she’s just a really weird person. Stefan Molyneux covered some of that weirdness here.

    Stefan makes some very good points about starting a marriage off on the right foot, hypergamy and the wall.

    “While I hope that the charges aren’t true, I wouldn’t argue that the kids are probably better off away from their parents, who seem completely detached from everyday reality.”

    I get the feeling this’ll be used against him in the custody battle, so that feeds into your first point.

  55. Oscar says:

    More on topic: check this out.

    “The woman cop [in Tulsa] who shot the guy, now she is charged with manslaughter. I mean, she shouldn’t have done that, but I must say: she is also a victim. She’s a victim of bad police training. Police do not train the way they should! If you’re that nervous, you can’t do this job.” ~ Bill Maher

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/09/24/bill-maher-on-tulsa-cop-who-shot-terence-crutcher-she-is-also-a-victim.html

  56. @Oscar:

    Women & Minority cops are several multiples more likely to shoot someone than a White Male cop. So much for police force diversity.

  57. Oscar says:

    @ LG

    That is correct. Black cops are more likely to shoot black suspects than white or Hispanic cops are.

    http://www.dailywire.com/news/7264/5-statistics-you-need-know-about-cops-killing-aaron-bandler

  58. Gunner Q says:

    “While I hope that the charges aren’t true, I wouldn’t argue that the kids are probably better off away from their parents, who seem completely detached from everyday reality.”

    If there was ever a family that made foster care look like a good idea, it’s a Hollywood celebrity power couple. Brad & Angie seem completely detached from everyday reality? No ship, Sherlock.

    BTW, is the National Enquirer ever accurate? I saw a cover story in the supermarket checkout line that they had obtained Hillary Clinton’s full medical history… only time I was ever tempted to buy the rag. You’d think every journalist everywhere would want to break a story that big.

  59. @Gunner Q:

    The insiders all know what they did with pushing the electronic medical records within Obamacare. Their “official” records, thus, simply don’t exist. They can pay for doctors to never write things down.

  60. Anonymous Reader says:

    Well, sure, Oscar, she’s a victim too because “woman”. They don’t even bother to try to hide it anymore.

    As for what happened, my guess: she put her finger on the trigger when she had no reason to shoot. Then a startle reflex caused her to cleanch her hand(s), and bang.

    Years ago I saw a video of a Negligent Discharge where a female cop put a round in the dirt right next to the head of a suspect who was compliant and being handcuffed. Both the man under arrest and the cop arresting him looked at the girl cop with almost the same expression; utter surprise. Best part: she dithered, then holstered her pistol, got into her patrol unit and drove away. Some people have no business being cops. In this case her finger wasn’t visible, but since it was some Double Action pistol like a Beretta 92 it’s obvious what happened.

    There is a good reasoning behind Rule #3, and this is but one example.

    (Rule #3: “Do not touch the trigger until your sights are aligned on target and you have decided to shoot”)

  61. Oscar says:

    @ Gunner Q says:
    September 26, 2016 at 1:02 pm

    “BTW, is the National Enquirer ever accurate?”

    They busted John Edwards and his mistress and bastard (while his wife was dying of cancer) before the “respectable” media did.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Edwards_extramarital_affair#Initial_National_Enquirer_allegations

    @ Anonymous Reader says:
    September 26, 2016 at 3:20 pm

    “Well, sure, Oscar, she’s a victim too because ‘woman’. They don’t even bother to try to hide it anymore.”

    Lovely, isn’t it?

    “In this case her finger wasn’t visible, but since it was some Double Action pistol like a Beretta 92 it’s obvious what happened.”

    I didn’t know it was a Beretta 92. That’s essentially the same as the M-9, correct? The M-9 has a thumb safety, a decocker AND a long, heavy double action trigger squeeze. Is the 92 the same?

  62. Anonymous Reader says:

    I didn’t know it was a Beretta 92.

    Careful, I’m referring to an older incident, back when all the cop shops were copying the Army’s pistol.

    I have no idea what sidearm the officer in Oklahoma had. Probably something newish from SIG or Glock or maybe S&W at a guess. They all go “bang” when someone puts a finger on the trigger…

    That’s essentially the same as the M-9, correct? The M-9 has a thumb safety, a decocker AND a long, heavy double action trigger squeeze. Is the 92 the same?

    Yes. First time I handled one I thought “You’d have to really work to have an ND with this”.
    Shows what I know about idiot-proofing.

  63. Oscar says:

    AR,

    Got it. I misunderstood you. Funny story: the closest I ever came to getting shot was when a fellow Soldier had an ND with an M-9 at a clearing barrel outside the chow hall in Iraq.

  64. anon says:

    From the article:
    “At Shaw Air Force Base in South Carolina, the committee said an F-16 squadron had 30 pilots with only four aircraft flying. Overall, the Air Force has reduced its flying-hour requirements and begun using half-size squadrons.”

    It’s less than half size. It’s half size if you count part time reservists.
    It’s actually about 33 percent manned at present.

  65. anon says:

    It’s not even a question of training new pilots….they don’t have the IPs (instructor pilots) to train them. So if they pump money into getting more pilots they are in danger of being “bottom heavy” with a lot of noobies who have no one to train them. The problem is with retention.

  66. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    The Emmy Award celebrated sitcom, Modern Family, will now introduce TV’s first transgender child actor (age 8): http://variety.com/2016/tv/news/modern-family-transgender-actor-jackson-millarker-1201870412/

    The comments beneath this article are mostly negative.

    Even so, what a sick society we’ve become. And how furiously fast the plummet. It seems that just two generations ago, things were mostly normal. The mentally ill were regarded as such.

  67. anon says:

    Anon: “All government spending should be cut in half. ALL, including military, entitlement programs, everything. Since we spend 115-125% of taxes collected, this can be a balanced budget with a ~40% tax cut as well.
    Sure, a lot of pigs will be cut off from the trough. But most government spending is a transfer from men to women anyway.
    This is politically impossible, of course. This is why democracy always devolves into a gyno-cult over time.”

    Nice how you lump the military with entitlement programs. The “gyno cult” education system has done some good work on you.

  68. Opus says:

    Is this really so new Red Pill Latecomer? – and is it not the modern version of the fairground freak? I attended an all male school and so I had the pleasure one year of watching two of my smaller prettier classmates assuming the roles in the school’s annual play – which that year was Oscar Wilde’s The Importance of Being Ernest – of The Honourable Gwendolyn Fairfax and Miss Cicely Cardew. A photo from the school magazine reveals just how Ladyboy-pretty they both were. It is a play full of innuendo but no one attempted to suggest that my classmates were either homo-sexually inclined or secret cross-dressers. Indeed one of the two used to go out of his way to play Rugby Football to demonstrate that despite his small size and gorgeous looks that he was indeed a fully-paid-up heterosexual though I was told years later that he was always fending off propositions from teachers, older students and the like – but he was English not Thai and so he could not turn his pretty petite looks to financial gain – married, became an English teacher which frankly – all that Keats – really is a bit girly.

    I was rather shocked when a friendly acquaintance of mine drew my attention to a You Tube video of a rather cut-down performance at his son’s school – a mixed school, that is to say all-white but with pupil so bot sexes – of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet. You might be expecting to hear that Romeo was played by a Boy and Juliet by a girl. Not so, for that would be sexist and both eponymous characters were played by girls – big strapping girls too – there’s the future of equality for you – though of course Gielgud had played Juliet on the London stage in the 1930s.

    I once however attended a Christmas performance of a school panto-mime wherein my girlfriend of the time performed the title role in Dick Whittington – how appropriate given her proclivity for Dick. I rather doubt that gets performed in America indeed I doubt America has ever heard of Whittington.

  69. Gunner Q says:

    “Nice how you lump the military with entitlement programs.”

    As an American taxpayer I’m tired of both useless welfare and useless wars. It’s nothing personal towards the grunts.

  70. anon says:

    Grunts, who also pay taxes, are more sick of useless wars than anyone.

  71. anon says:

    Here is a rough example. There are a thousand, but this is a good example of the cascading consequences. The VA during Sequestration. It didn’t just effect Panda-cam.
    “Non essential personnel” included the people who process all the paperwork for filing claims. So a veteran who needed care had no one to process the claim to get him into the system. The system backed up, results of which you’ve read in the papers. This didn’t save any money whatsoever (civil servants were all in a paid vacation) it just harmed Veterans. And then of course the civil servants (civilian government employees) who were deemed “essential” and stayed were mad that they didn’t get a paid vacation too.
    It’s a mess but harming the military, which is just about the only legitimate government expenditure (security) isn’t solving the problem. I say “isn’t solving” rather than “won’t solve” because it’s going on right now and has been for a long while. Our forces have never been stretched anywhere near this thin. Not even prior to WWII because then we didn’t have security guarantees everywhere around the globe.

  72. Gunner Q says:

    So, let’s cut military funding until our traitor-cuck leaders can’t afford keep the military in Shittistan, can’t start World War Soros with Russia and are forced to disband NATO. The actual defense of North America from foreign aggressors is relatively cheap.

    Beside, it’s the domestic aggressors who are going to murder us in our sleep.

  73. anon says:

    I agree Gunner Q. We have to cut it off at the source. Not in between.
    Just arbitrarily cutting funding without changing anything at the source (the security commitments around the globe, pointless wars, ect), is like fixing the plumbing by poking a bunch of holes in the pipes.

  74. feeriker says:

    The actual defense of North America from foreign aggressors is relatively cheap.

    Beside, it’s the domestic aggressors who are going to murder us in our sleep.

    Yep. There are no “foreign aggressors” against the U.S. who are of any military consequence. All of our REAL enemies occupy offices within the I-495 (Capitol Beltway).

    It always mystifies me that the same Amoricons who whine endlessly (though completely justifiably) about how bloated, corrupt, inept, and useless the fedgov is somehow seem to think that that same government that is such an abject failure in every other aspect of its functionality can somehow flawlessly deliver national defense.

  75. @Guunner Q

    The actual defense of North America from foreign aggressors is relatively cheap.

    Beside, it’s the domestic aggressors who are going to murder us in our sleep.

    Amen.

  76. Lyn87 says:

    Defense is one of the six legitimate functions of the U.S. government. The entire list is as follows:
    We the People of the United States, in Order to 1) form a more perfect Union, 2) establish Justice, 3) insure domestic Tranquility, 4) provide for the common defence, 5) promote the general Welfare, and 6) secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

    That said, maintaining troops all over the world may or may not be the correct course of action. Does it enhance our defense to have troops “forward,” or does it create more enemies abroad and thus undermine our defense? Do our far-flung security commitments enhance international trade and thus “promote the general welfare” and “secure the blessings of liberty” (by creating a “Pax Americana”), or does the money we spend creating that environment outweigh the gains? I dunno’ – and neither does anyone else, although historical examples of times when the international system was “ordered” by a superpower and when it was not may shed some light – and it’s a mixed bag. I suspect for each such question the answer contains elements of both.

    What is not open for debate among reasonable people is the fact that we spend far too much money on things that are known to be counterproductive, and whether we chop defense or not, we could easily dismantle and de-fund the vast majority of non-defense-related spending at the federal level and immediately be immeasurably better off for it. A great place to start would be to disarm every federal employee other than field agents of the U.S. Marshall’s Service, the Capitol Police, and the guys who guard the First Family. The Department of Education certainly does not need a S.W.A.T. team, as one example among many. If other government employees feel the need to be armed, let them abide by whatever laws govern the carrying of weapons in whatever jurisdiction they’re in just like the rest of us have to do.

    But Dalrock’s original point stands: the people telling us we’re in crisis-mode don’t act like they believe it – else they would be stripping the military of people and things that degrade combat effectiveness (women, gays, trannies, the SHARP program, and the M-9 pistol, for starters), rather than going forward pell-mell with SJW social experiments, promoting flag officers based on politics rather than combat effectiveness, and buying weapon systems that cost too much and do too little.

  77. @Lyn87

    If we take an expansive view of “provide for the common defence” then they can take an expansive view of “promote the general Welfare.”

    If having 10,000 military bases around the world is justified under “provide for the common defence” then public schools and baby daddy checks can be justified under “promote the general Welfare.”

    Conservatives are loathe to admit it, but our pork-barrel defense spending is really just Keynesian stimulus and a back handed (and arguably inefficient) way to subsidize general scientific and technological research. If it wasn’t for pork barrel defense spending, we would likely not have the internet. I may have jibed Northrop Grumman in my earlier comment, but they are really no different that a Soviet Ministry of Military Technology, but in our pretend-“free market” capitalist system, we have to allow the capitalists (shareholders) to skim the profits off of the top, because if the profits were instead funneled to the citizenry, that would be “socialism” and we can’t have that.

    So that’s the real conundrum with the system as it stands – we must subsidize private industry and pretend it’s a “free market” otherwise we’d have to acknowledge it’s really socialism for the rich.

    After all, that is what they mean by a “crisis of democracy” – that is when the average citizen starts to demand a greater share of the socialist spoils, which the Wall Street barons call a “crisis.”

    So – the crisis is real, in that sense.

    “House Panel says $1 Trillion Needed to Reboot Military.” – properly translated, means, “a decade of near zero interest rates has made capital cheap, so more money must be confiscated from the average person and transferred to Wall Street and the stock funds that own Northrop Grumman, because we’re in a crisis of low profits for the rich.”

  78. Lyn87 says:

    HR,

    I wasn’t saying that all those U.S. overseas bases are absolutely justified – I tend to think that they’re significantly overdone (BTW, it’s 662 bases, not 10,000, and the vast majority of them are quite small) – but that one can at least make the argument that having one’s defensive line farther afield than the 12-mile maritime limit has a rationale that comports with one of the legitimate functions of government… in ways that transferring money from producers to human parasites does not. If there’s one thing some people only learn the hard way, it’s that “defense-in-depth” is vastly preferable to “hold-the-line.”

    That said, we don’t really have a military crisis, which is why we can afford to pretend that great falsehoods are true… falsehoods like, “Women can fight as well as men.”

    But since I spent 20+ years in uniform, and I now make my living as a DRC (Dirty Rotten Contractor), I’m cashing in on the madness. Why not? I paid into the system all my life both in uniform and as a civilian in and out of government service, and I’m not going to turn down either the deferred pay that comes in the form of a military pension or the money trough that lets guys like me turn our hard-won expertise into legal tender.

    I’ve certainly done my part: I paid my dues and earned my spurs while simultaneously supporting libertarianism, so I can say both, “I did what was in my power to stop this” and “I personally gave you what you asked for – pay me.” I’m milking it, now… bleeding the system one big, fat paycheck at a time.

  79. Opus says:

    My old school-friend was in The Netherlands this week retracing by bicycle his father’s war-time route. This put me in mind of the fact (coincidence) that on 17th September 1944 my Father, like his, also flew to Arnhem. Unlike a third of his troop – he, a conscript soldier who then held the rank of Sergeant – used his return ticket. I cannot even comprehend what it must have been like on the 16th knowing that the next day might well be ones last, so I am equally at a loss to understand why women now rush – or are being pushed – to achieve front-line combat status. My Father certainly needed psychiatric help and I have come across old soldiers who clearly are stuck mentally in Malaya or The Falklands or as the case may be. One former Lance Corporal, possibly the bravest man I have ever known told me that as he went ashore in 1982 he was more terrified than he had ever been.

    I can only deduce that you simply have no enemy capable of causing you any real problem.

  80. Boxer says:

    I’ve certainly done my part: I paid my dues and earned my spurs while simultaneously supporting libertarianism, so I can say both, “I did what was in my power to stop this” and “I personally gave you what you asked for – pay me.” I’m milking it, now… bleeding the system one big, fat paycheck at a time.

    If you weren’t getting it, your pittance would just get squandered on nonsense, like most of the rest.

  81. anon says:

    “(BTW, it’s 662 bases, not 10,000, and the vast majority of them are quite small)”

    I was wondering where the 10,000 number came from. If you are correct and we have 662 bases, that’s down from from Sept 2001 data, when there were 725 foreign US military installations. But many (as you noted) of those installations are pretty modest, simply communications or logistics. Others are little “joint” workin’n’trainin the locals operations.
    Then there are the hospitals, which are often listed as separate installations.
    For example at Aviano (unless things have changed) there are about five different “installations” but it’s really one…they just separate it

  82. Lyn87 says:

    anon,

    The number 662 is the most recent I could find. It comes from the Department of Defense’s 2010 Base Structure Report and is referenced in this “Politifact” article from September 2011, which states that the US military maintained 662 foreign sites in 38 countries in 2009. At that time there were U.S. military personnel in 148 countries, but that includes things like personnel swaps we do with allies where we send a couple of guys to them and they send a couple of guys to us for a year or two so each nation has a few guys who have actually worked in the ally’s units. In 56 of those countries there are fewer than 10 people, and we maintained more than 1000 people in only 13 countries (Belgium, Germany, Italy, Spain, Turkey, the United Kingdom, Japan, Bahrain, Djibouti, South Korea, Iraq, Afghanistan and Kuwait), nine of which are better known as vacation destinations for U.S tourists than combat zones for U.S. servicemen.

    Boxer,

    Indeed, it’s a drop in the ocean to them, but it works well at the individual level for me and mine. The system is going down with or without me… I might as well take what they’re willing to give while they’re still in a giving mood.

  83. Anon says:

    Nice how you lump the military with entitlement programs. The “gyno cult” education system has done some good work on you.

    You are just a cuckservative. You assume the quality of the military has a 1:1 correlation to each dollar spent, ignoring how much ‘military’ spending is really just lefty social engineering.

    A series of smart, surgical cuts to 2016 military spending would actually strengthen the military, not weaken it. It is too back you don’t grasp that.

  84. anon says:

    “A series of smart, surgical cuts to 2016 military spending would actually strengthen the military, not weaken it. It is too back you don’t grasp that.”

    You didn’t advocate a series of “smart, surgical cuts”, you simply lumped the military in with entitlement programs as though it were an entitlement program.
    But thanks for the intellectual rigor. Good job with the talking points. Get that from Rumsfeld? It sounds like something he would come up with.

  85. Anon says:

    Good job with the talking points. Get that from Rumsfeld? It sounds like something he would come up with.

    You are butthurt, based on how everyone is saying a reduction in military spending would be beneficial. For simplicity, every aspect of government spending should be cut in half (through surgical downsizing).

    What, are you someone who directly benefits from defense pork?

  86. MarcusD says:

    Question about disparity of interest in marital relations
    http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=1026264

  87. Opus says:

    I believe I am correct in saying that America has six bases in Great Britain (as we used to call it though for some reason everyone now refers to it as the United Kingdom): Airstrip 1 – cheaper and less precarious than an aircraft carrier – but how would you feel if in say 1836 there were say still French bases in the thirteen colonies – to protect against an alleged Canadian invasion: Yankees [that means you and not just those from New York – a distinction too subtle for us to make] go home – you sometimes see scrawled on walls in these parts. I once attended an athletics competition (as a spectator) at one of the six bases which despite it being an American base goes by the name of R.A.F Mildenhall.

    Empire gets a bad press but America only does Empire-lite; what would your founding fathers have said!

  88. Don Quixote says:

    Boxer says:
    September 27, 2016 at 6:10 pm

    Hey Boxer, the hypocrites [ADL] are on your tail:
    http://time.com/4510849/pepe-the-frog-adl-hate-symbol/

  89. Avraham rosenblum says:

    Opus. My father in law I also noticed was kind of stuck mentally in WWII. He was some kind of partisan fighting the Nazis somewhere in the European Theater. [I do not know where. It could not have been in France.] But even years later he was still there in his mind.
    My Dad on the other hand I think just tried to forget the whole thing as much as possible. He served honorably also in the European Theater as a captain in the USAF. But it was next to impossible to get him to talk about it.

  90. anon says:

    “For simplicity, every aspect of government spending should be cut in half (through surgical downsizing).”

    There is no simplicity to it. Maybe longterm cost cutting measures are extremely expensive in the short term. Base closure is an example. There are some advantages to having locations available around the globe unless we serious plan on never having to defend the ROK it’s actually more cost effective to have a presence there. And tearing the bases down is (again) very very expensive short term. That’s why they’ve been talking about closing Yongsan for over a decade now and haven’t done so. It’s actually cheaper, in some respects, to fly out of the ROK since the host nation fields some of the costs.
    This is because it is advantageous for them to do so…not only for defense but a base is a major cash cow for them. Not only for military industry but the whole community. See what happened to Key West in the 70s when the Navy base shut down (it was reopened). Storefront properties were being given away for a dollar a building, land that is worth about five million they couldn’t even give away forty years ago. And Key West has virtually no war industry to speak of.

  91. anon says:

    Not “maybe”, “many” above, meant to say.
    Another example…shutting down the pipeline for a major project (like the F22 for instance) is extremely expensive. Yeah, we shut down the pipeline but we had to pay Lockheed billions in compensation to do so (since we didn’t fulfill our order). AND we don’t get anything from it and had to then get other “cheaper” planes. Which was far from cheap.

  92. Oscar says:

    Is it The Magnificent Seven, or is it The Politically Correct Seven.

    http://hotair.com/archives/2016/09/27/film-review-magnificent-seven/

  93. Hmm says:

    Oscar: Can’t be politically correct. All 7 are guys.

  94. Oscar says:

    Yeah, but the obligatory hot chick gets some obligatory action scenes.

  95. Lost Patrol says:

    In the spirit of The Politically Correct Seven – here is a major feminist BBC personality scolding Trump, and all men by extension viz women’s weight. PC, feelings, hamsters, the sisterhood, shaming, things-men-are-not-allowed-to-say; it’s all there in a few sentences.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-37491013

    An aside. For years the BBC World Service was my most reliable source of actual unbiased reporting. I still check there, but have sadly observed the BBC decline into another shill for the Brave New World.

  96. PokeSalad says:

    If you are correct and we have 662 bases, that’s down from from Sept 2001 data, when there were 725 foreign US military installations.

    Look at the bright side, Gitmo will probably go away soon and there’ll be one fewer…. /sarc

  97. BillyS says:

    The only reason the US needs all those bases is because it is trying to “police the world”. The problem is that many things depend on US hegemony.

    Stepping back will happen, but probably only when it is forced.

    One example: Why do the people in the US care what happens with South Korea? Nice folks perhaps, but let them take care of their country.

  98. DrTorch says:

    “what astounds me are the number of boobs and skinny arms (women) that wear the uniform ”

    Funny story- took my son to mat club on Mon. It’s open to whole community. Newcomer, young asst coach for local HS, brings (girl?)friend. Boasts she’s newly minted 2nd LT.

    Now my son is pretty good (said the proud father), but she had easily 20-25 lbs on my 90lb 8th grader. When I offered her the chance to wrestle my son, fear consumed her face and she muttered that this was just her first time.

    Sure, I get that, but none of the first time boys are too terrified to give it a go. And if you’re in actual combat, do you get to tell your enemy, “I need to pass on this one, it’s my first time.”

  99. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    The only reason the US needs all those bases is because it is trying to “police the world”. …

    Why do the people in the US care what happens with South Korea? Nice folks perhaps, but let them take care of their country.

    U.S. bases in Saudi Arabia (to use another example) don’t protect Saudi Arabia. They’re pointing an American gun at Saudi Arabia. To make sure the current king does out bidding (give us cheap oil; don’t attack Israel, etc.).

    That’s the reason for most American military bases. To control who runs the country. To protect friendly dictators from unfriendly coups. And to overthrow unfriendly dictators through friendly coups.

    We’re not policing the world. We’re trying to occupy and control it.

  100. Anon says:

    We’re not policing the world. We’re trying to occupy and control it.

    At a minimum, our involvement in the other *hemisphere* is far more than it needs to be.

    We no longer need OPEC oil and certainly Persian Gulf oil. Our involvement in the Middle East is extremely cost-ineffective.

    Regarding North Korea, WE are spending money to defend SK and Japan because that fat fuck is in power? Instead, why not tell China that all Chinese goods into the US will have a tariff until China makes the fat boy go away. Then, the tariff will be lifted. The fat boy will only last as long as China wants him to.

    We are spending a ton of money on places that are more than 7000 miles away from our shores.

  101. BillyS says:

    We’re not policing the world. We’re trying to occupy and control it.

    Which is a form of modern policing. I regret that, but it is reality. We are far past the Andy Griffith policing model, in all areas.

    The US cannot afford to leave everyplace, but it cannot afford to stay.

    What cannot continue will not continue. I lament the destruction things falling apart will cause though, however much I support that happening.

  102. feeriker says:

    http://hotair.com/archives/2016/09/27/film-review-magnificent-seven/

    *SIGH*

    Not long ago I mentioned something in these parts, semi-facetiously, to the effect that they’d probably get around to remaking –and butchering– this classic. I see that my nightmare has come true.

    I’ll be selfish here and let someone else suffer through watching it.

  103. Gunner Q says:

    Opus @ 2:24 am:
    “Empire gets a bad press but America only does Empire-lite; what would your founding fathers have said!”

    An excerpt from George Washington’s farewell address:

    “Observe good faith and justice towards all nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all. …

    “In the execution of such a plan, nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded; and that, in place of them, just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated. The nation which indulges towards another a habitual hatred or a habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. Antipathy in one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and intractable, when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur. Hence, frequent collisions, obstinate, envenomed, and bloody contests. The nation, prompted by ill-will and resentment, sometimes impels to war the government, contrary to the best calculations of policy. The government sometimes participates in the national propensity, and adopts through passion what reason would reject; at other times it makes the animosity of the nation subservient to projects of hostility instigated by pride, ambition, and other sinister and pernicious motives. The peace often, sometimes perhaps the liberty, of nations, has been the victim.

    “So likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation), facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.”

  104. Lyn87 says:

    Red Pill Latecomer,

    There aren’t enough U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia to occupy a small city like Najran, much less coerce the entire nation of 32 million people. The force in Saudi Arabia consists of a handful of trainers and maintainers and the people who support that mission, most of whom are there to keep Saudi jets in the air as a counter-weight to mutual threats / enemies like Iran and Yemen. The number of U.S. combat troops is negligible, and they have nothing bigger than Mark 19’s and M-2’s… and I’m not even sure about those. They’re REMFs with brains – not grunts with brawn. What’s more – it’s a career-killer: it’s one of those places where they send guys who aren’t going any higher to run out their retirement clocks working with an ally that wouldn’t know Navy SEALs from Harp seals.

    A gun to their heads? The Saudis may be incompetent by our standards, but If they wanted to kill every American in their country they could start after breakfast and be done by lunch. Good grief… the Riyadh police force could get most of them all by themselves while their military forces sipped chai and talked about the camels they were going to shag that night.

    But why would they? The Saudis pay the Pentagon billions to have access to U.S military expertise in their country (the U.S. force there may not be a fighting force, but they’re a hell of a lot smarter than the Saudis are when it comes to planning, training, and maintaining)… they need that so much that they pay us to do it for them.

    As for Israel… it’s an open secret that the Mossad and the Saudi Intelligence Service work together because the two countries have common enemies. They really do hate the Israelis, but they know that Israel isn’t going to attack them without provocation… whereas Iran might. In fact, it’s an open question where Iran would target with it’s first nuke if it gets the capability: Tel Aviv or Riyadh.

  105. Dave says:

    @REASON:

    https://www.yahoo.com/gma/elizabeth-gilbert-opens-leaving-her-husband-her-best-203908009–abc-news-entertainment.html

    “Now I’ve just left another marriage, it’s starting to look irresponsible and people are saying I’m having a midlife crisis, and ‘What is she doing?'” Gilbert said in a Facebook Live chat Tuesday.

    “All I’m doing is telling the truth, again, and again, and again. In a way that says, ‘This isn’t working for me, I have to do this now,'” she said.

    Earlier this month, the “Eat, Pray, Love” author, 47, announced that she was ending her nine-year marriage to Jose Nunes after realizing her “true feelings” for author, musician and hairstylist Rayya Elias, her friend for 15 years.

    I am getting more convinced everyday that our generation probably has more crazy people than any other generation that has come before us.

  106. @Dave:

    I blame radioactivity and sugar. But I’m willing to accept other reasons.

  107. REASON says:

    @ Dave

    Our society is screwed and there is no going back.
    Any young man that gets married now is basically playing Russian Roulette and no amount of game can save him if his wife is exposed to the wrong things and doesn’t
    have a heart that is truly devoted to Obeying God

    Look at this:
    https://www.yahoo.com/news/marriage-broke-down-around-age-180000461.html

  108. Oscar says:

    @ Lyn87 says:
    September 28, 2016 at 7:03 pm

    “As for Israel… it’s an open secret that the Mossad and the Saudi Intelligence Service work together because the two countries have common enemies. They really do hate the Israelis, but they know that Israel isn’t going to attack them without provocation… whereas Iran might.”

    I think few Americans know about the historical animosity between Arabs and Persians. But if the Persians are going to make a move, they’d better do it soon.

    https://ricochet.com/archives/demographic-shifts-are-hitting-the-muslim-world-too/

    “Iran’s total fertility rate plunged to an estimated 1.6% in 2010, barely above Europe’s rate of 1.5 children per female.”

    Persians are better at waging war than Arabs are, but they’re already greatly outnumbered, and soon the Persian population will be old and shrinking.

  109. Lyn87 says:

    Oscar,

    As I’m sure you know, their maps don’t include Israel (they have the entire area (mis)-labeled as “Palestine”). Many people know that the Ay-Rabs pretend Israel isn’t really there (at least officially), but their maps also don’t include the words “Persian Gulf.” Their maps show a body of water between Iran and the Arabian Peninsula, alright, but they insist that its proper name is “Arabian Gulf.”

    For those who don’t know this: not only are Arabs and Persians mostly on opposite sides of the Sunni-Shia divide (heretics are even more hated than infidels), but they are ethnically different as well… with bloody animosities that go back about 2700 years. Now toss all that hatred and dysfunction into a confined area with a gutter religion and a sense of tribalism that are both so ingrained that people have been marrying their first cousins for 14 centuries… with all the pathologies that entails.

  110. PuffyJacket says:

    A sense of proportion is needed on the military spending.

    It is trivial to debate whether military expenditures should be 2% of GDP or 4%, when total government spending is 40% of GDP, and annual deficits are in the 5-10% range, even during our economic “recovery”.

    And let’s not forget that the military is one of the few branches of government that provides ANY value whatsoever, whereas most gov’t spending is just a transfer to women for having a vagina.

  111. Lyn87 says:

    PufyJacket,

    Well said. Every time I hear the Hilldebeast or some Obamabot talking about the so-called “recovery” I’m reminded of a line from the 1992 VP debate when the shoe was on the other political foot and Lloyd Benson said something like, “I could create [the appearance of] a strong recovery, too… if I could write $2 Trillion worth of bad checks.”

    Indeed – he was correct.

    But now that a Democrat president is the one who promised the Moon to low-information voters and has been writing the bad checks to make it happen (to the tune of $8 Trillion to do what Reagan did with 1/4 of that amount), this recovery is somehow “real.” It’s not any more real now than when the Democrats criticized the Republicans for doing it, of course, but we can’t let facts get in the way of the narrative, can we? Of all the things said in the debate this week that people should have paid attention to, it’s when Trump said that we’re living in an economic bubble. We’ve been devaluing our currency for years, and a HARD reset is coming our way. It is already too late to prevent a lot of pain, but it’s not (quite) yet too late to avert catastrophic failure.

    That’s not politics – it’s arithmetic.

  112. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Lloyd Benson ran for Veep in 1988, not 1992

  113. anon says:

    “And let’s not forget that the military is one of the few branches of government that provides ANY value whatsoever, whereas most gov’t spending is just a transfer to women for having a vagina.”

    Yes. And the Defense budget is 16 percent of our overall Federal Budget.
    http://www.cbpp.org/most-of-budget-goes-toward-defense-social-security-and-major-health-programs-0

    Furthermore, it’s important to look at the whole military budget and consider how much goes in to Operational expenses (that’s what most people think of when they think “military spending”), it’s less than half, closer to a third.

  114. Lyn87 says:

    RPL,

    Thanks – I stand corrected. It was 1988 – not 1992.

  115. Anonymous Reader says:

    Scott – that’s how girls are, she’s just more honest about it than many, that’s all.

  116. American says:

    As an honorably discharged veteran who served before being a lesbian transgendered male with giraffe horns became fashionable in the military, I say put all the SJW’s on the front line of whatever happens and whatever happens happens. 🙂. If they win, we win. If they lose and die in battle, we win. It’s a win win.

  117. Anon says:

    I say put all the SJW’s on the front line of whatever happens and whatever happens happens.

    Alas, the only society where a climate for SJWs to emerge and thrive can exist, by definition is a society where such SJWs would never face real hardship.

    In other words, only in a society where what you suggest could never happen, will SJWs emerge in the first place.

  118. Gunner Q says:

    “I say put all the SJW’s on the front line of whatever happens and whatever happens happen.”

    So they can betray us for cash and prizes while sleeping with the enemy? Those Chicomm goatherders have proven to be sexier than American Special Forces operators.

  119. anon says:

    In real, “if I were Emperor” calculations, the DPRK would probably implode if we left and KJU could no longer blame all their woes on us Imperialist pigs. It’s hard to keep up that claim if we’re no longer there to be boogyman. News is hard to get in the DPRK but news of that scale would get out.

    Next move on the chess board: Tens of millions of refugees start spilling over into China and South Korea, destabilizing the area. South Korea cannot afford to “win” and China cannot afford to let them.

Please see the comment policy linked from the top menu.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s