Archive for the ‘War’ category

Without Iraq and Afghanistan to kill terrorists the US will see mass casualties

June 1, 2015

Bush II’s plan, intentional or not, was working quite well given that the kill ratio was about 10 to 1 in Iraq.

What was the kill ratio in favor of jihadists at the Marathon Boston place again? Mumbai?

When the terrorists shoot civilians in places like France’s anti Muslim atheist publications, they tend to do pretty well. When terrorists fight US military at war, when the leader is not a traitorous Hussein, things don’t go so well for the terrorists.

So the reason ISIL and AQ 3.0 has so much manpower to spare is because Iraq and Afghanistan is no longer operating as they did under Bush II. Which is perhaps, the intent of the current rulers of the US. Somebody has to get the foreigners to come invade to setup the pretext for emergency rule, right. When the terrorists can kill 100 Americans with only a few jihadist sacrifices, that’s a good attrition rate for them.

Minor comment on current day Americans and loyalty to country, Christianity, and the Left’s Messiah death cult

May 14, 2015

People place too much confidence in their ability to determine people’s motivations, beliefs, and thoughts. They may be accurate for some people, but that does not extend to the majority of either faction.

It is especially inaccurate for people who cannot make accurate predictions about the present or future, to then use that inaccurate personal judgment to decide what a bunch of people they have never met, feels, thinks, and knows.

It’s not something they can know. All they know is the people they’ve interviewed and interrogated, which isn’t even a good sized sample.

[This is a reference to the subject of whether Democrats are guilt or not, and whether they are ignorant or not, and whether they harbor malicious intentions or whether Hussein is just incompetent. The entire manifold complex]

A profiler or interrogator that tries to take random samplings of what people say and then use that as a way to judge the expressions, lies, and emotional reactions of the subject in front of them, isn’t conducting any kind of professional operation.

It may be a scientific study, but the results will be less practical and far too abstract to be of immediate use.

Of course the reverse may also be true, where anyone who interviews a single family member then somehow thinks they have the Skeleton key to unlock the psychological secrets of everybody else on this planet.

In the end, the proof is in the prediction and the percentage of accuracy. I told people that the Left obeys authority and that all of them would have little trouble obeying the Death Squads or giving those extermination groups the locations of American patriots. GB talked about people being innocent because they are ignorant. As the US authorities care about ignorance as being a defense in crimes. But even if they do, it doesn’t change the highly inaccurate portrayals and theories presented by the “we know they are ignorant of this” line of theorizing.

Are we supposed to take their words at face value? So when Islamic Jihad says Islam is peace and that they are peaceful, we take at face value their “good intentions”. Of what purpose or benefit does that serve?

If the Left and Islam says they will kill you and then they actually go out and kill someone, that has weight to it. But the mere words people espouse about their own intentions have little weight to them in and of itself.

When the Left shows by their words and actions that they are innocent, does that mean they won’t ever push the security button to let the death squads in the door? What matters are their actions, not the words they use to cover up their intentions. Nor does it matter what their intentions are, what matters is what they actually do and how their behavior fits into the predictive models. A model using good intentions and the previous words of people to gauge their danger levels is not going to be able to handle things. Humans are fickle, they can decide at any time to obey evil, and they already have.

In the past it was difficult to obtain relevant examples of people obeying death squads or providing information detrimental to American patriots. The IRS changed that. The Texas shootings changed that. But even then, there were plenty of examples before then. They just weren’t relevant to the people who obtained the “good intentions” of the Left from their friendly neighborhood association of families. They just weren’t relevant to the people who obtained their good impression of homos and Islamos from their friendly neighborhood proto Gaystapo and Islamic Muslim “free speech” good intentioned “Americans”.

Since a good intentioned Muslim can obey the evil of Islam at any moment, what does it matter whether GB says their intentions are good or not? What does it matter if the Left says their intentions are good or not? It doesn’t even matter what their intentions are.

Homos had good intentions? Maybe. Until the Gaystapo told them to find the heretics and make them pay. Then those good intentions kind of evaporated. Funny enough that’s the reality people don’t want to deal with. They keep making excuses that they couldn’t predict it ahead of time. Obviously you can’t predict anything by relying on people’s proclaimed good intent.

That’s what happens when people place an overly high importance on reading intentions. Being right doesn’t mean they can deal with what people do.

Public officials and individuals like Clinton are much easier to read. Their profiling is much more useful and calculating the intent or not of Hussein may or may not be useful. But I avoid the claim that Hussein had good or bad intentions. Evil isn’t about intent. Whether Hussein destroys the US or not, is an element of fate, it is not an element of what people intend to do. But if it helps people understand that someone is evil by convincing them that they intended it, there is plenty of evidence to support that as well if needed. But the proof of evil does not require intent. Obedience to evil does not require bad or good intentions.

A so called American can claim to be for free speech and still be against Palin and Geller. Hypocrisy is not the point in this context, the point is that their actions matter more than what they say.

If the predicton is correct that Leftists obey evil, then until someone with “good intentions” refuses to obey the Left, what does it matter what people think that intention is? Once they refuse to obey the Left, they stop being a Leftist. Of course there are people who fall from the Circle and try to get back in, I’m sure their good intentions will not save them from the fire or from the guilt. Getting back into the den of evil after they threw a person out, is that person good or bad? Good intentioned or bad intentioned? I’m not sure it matters and in fact there’s a lot of arguments I use to demonstrate that it matters not.

When humans are under Authority, what they will do is based on the orders they get from that Authority. There’s no such thing as free will there in the enemy. That’s not what we are dealing with here. If they are told to give up the locations of Tea Party patriots to the death squads, the Left will. And it does not matter whether people like to differentiate them into “innocent” ignorant savages with good intentions or whether they want to differentiate them into the elite priest leadership cadre of the Clintons and Messiah Husseins. One may give the orders and the other obeys, but both are guilty. Merely because one party has more guilt, does not exonerate the other parties involved.

Southern Poverty Law Center linked with terrorism

May 12, 2015

Of course this isn’t the first time. It’s not the first time they were linked to other members of the Leftist alliance and while people like to excuse their practices as merely soliciting money from ignorant Democrats, there’s a lot more going on than people want to acknowledge.

I called it first Pamela Geller would be dead if she worked with the FBI/DHS

May 9, 2015

People like me may be seen as paranoid. It comes through a unique insight into human affairs, that is far and above beyond what is capable by most normal mortals. It’s almost a sixth sense, preternatural abilities. Except that this can merely be acquired through hard work and vigilance, not blood inheritance. Or not merely blood inheritance.

I wrote, in bold:


That’s a good thing. If she gets into contact with DHS, she’ll be dead soon given the Left’s alliance with Islam. The DHS and FBI are so full of Muslim agents and Leftist sympaticos that I wouldn’t touch them with a ten foot pole if it could be helped.

Last time the FBI “contacted” a group in WACO, they and their children mysteriously all died.

Besides, America has a number of excellent mercenary, executive protection, and VIP protection private teams. I can refer her to some, even, for close in detail support. Don’t look to the traitor Government to protect you, look to your fellow Americans, who accept honest and solid, for now, cash.

There are enough socialized killers working as security in America’s private firms that no amount of ISIL could overwhelm using merely small arms. You don’t hear about them because they aren’t stupid.</b>

Seeing the future is not always a gift and often is a curse

April 28, 2015

My comments from the Way Back Machine concerning the Iraq war and various issues is there.

It makes sense that after Hussein’s being crowned US Emperor, that I could say little about Iraq’s future there. Because all I could see was Iraq’s destruction, and the destruction of what everyone else had achieved. The traitors had won, and some of them didn’t even know it.

The comments at that thread was made before Hussein’s coronation as Supreme Leader. When the useful idiots of the Left still had the mask and pretension of talking about law and order, miranda rights, and various other bullsh smoke they threw our way. Even then, you could still see the hints I dropped concerning my real feelings about the Leftist alliance and all who worked for their cause, knowingly or unknowingly (following orders, I didn’t know what was in the camps). Both are equally guilty.

When the US elects an evil mad dog as leader expect the unexpected

April 27, 2015

As expected. Some people thought it was going to be a crisis that generates emergency rule, right.

Others said the military would play a part, although which part is undecided.

Hardcore fighters vs moderate majorities

March 1, 2015

VoxDay wrote up an interesting piece concerning different fighters or humans in a conflict/war, with Christianity being the focus.

I reproduced my comment reply here.

Over the last number of years, from around 2005 perhaps, I’ve found interesting clues that Western modern education doesn’t tend to touch upon.

“Out of every one hundred men, ten shouldn’t even be there, eighty are just targets, nine are the real fighters, and we are lucky to have them, for they make the battle. Ah, but the one, one is a warrior, and he will bring the others back.”

This statistical narrative falls in line with the US Revolution, where 3% were the firebrands and active pushers. 33% was Loyalist. 33% was moderate or stuck on the fence looking. 33% was slightly in support. That 1-3% chunk, though, were the ones pushing it, however. They were outliers.

I’ve heard that Japanese colleges teach about the trial of Socrates, studying the accusers and the defendant’s wording. It was all documented too, for us in the modern times, since the Islamic Hordes failed to burn all of it at Alexandria.

I would rather die having spoken in my manner, than speak in your manner and live. For neither in war nor yet in law ought any man use every way of escaping death. For often in battle there is no doubt that if a man will throw away his arms, and fall on his knees before his pursuers, he may escape death, if a man is willing to say or do anything. The difficulty, my friends, is not in avoiding death, but in avoiding unrighteousness; for that runs deeper than death. – Socrates before the Athenian death panel

I thought Socrates was being obedient to Law, when taking his sentence and refusing Plato’s and his student’s escape plan. But judging by the long list of words he lectured the Athenians on, Socrates was taking the opposite stance, it seemed. He was contemptuous of the state’s ability to deal death when it comes to forcing people to obey, because he was only obeying his own conscience and ensuring that future generations would know just who did what in those days. Which turned out to be true, people still remember that, and if not the West, then the Japanese.

Some other quotes highlight risk taking vs conservative risk avoidance.

“‘He either fears his fate too much,
Or his dessert is small,
Who fears to put it to the touch,
And win or lose it all.’ – Montrose’s Toast

“Cause pain before you injure. Injure before you maim. Maim before you kill. And if you must kill, make it a clean kill. Squeeze every drop of life from the opponent. Because life is so precious, it cannot be wasted, even in death.”

“Let him cut your skin, and you cut his flesh. Let him cut your flesh, and you cut his bones. Let him cut your bones, and you cut off his life.”

I think from an end retrospective, 30% of frontline fighters being backed up by 70% back end support is workable. Obviously it can be said that people are in war in Iraq while others are shopping at the mall, but in a modern culture that’s somewhat unavoidable. It’s not necessarily bad either, it’s only bad when the 30% gets sent off a cliff, while the 70% vote on whose bipartisan interests it would be best to fund. 2 Wolves and a lamb voting on what’s for dinner. Even in WWII, the people who refused to shoot the enemy or otherwise couldn’t do so with any real accuracy, at least loaded the guns for the shooters that did want to and could shoot the enemy in the face. While that is not necessarily ideal, it is not something to be ashamed of either. Humans have always specialized in a free economy, with war being free in one sense of the term. You’re free to die or win based upon your own contribution and your side’s contributions (or lack of).

This would explain why I often said in 2008 onwards that what people needed to feel was hate or any other strong emotion that motivated them to fight. It appeared to me at the time that many people just didn’t want to confront or fight the Left. They were satisfied with diplomacy or bipartisan deals. The only people the American people were willing to fight were foreign jihadists, and part of that was due to social conformity and propaganda.

I wanted people to be personally motivated in fighting the enemy, which just happened to be closer to us than most people wanted to realize.

While warriors and soldiers can fight an enemy without feeling hate, fear, anger, or love, the same cannot be said for risk averse moderate majorities. And without the moderate majority, we don’t really have an army. We just have a bunch of targets that is going to get sliced off in a pocket and then annihilated. That is often enough to generate an Alamo, an infamous Last Stand, or the Battle of Thermopylae, but that isn’t enough to win a war.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.