Post: #26

(05-12-2017 04:05 PM)TigerMandingo Wrote:  

(05-12-2017 03:41 PM)Samseau Wrote:  NATO should be disbanded, all we're doing is funding the defense of Europe's Islamization.

It would be in the US interest to help Europe, since it is primarily responsible for this Muslim invasion of the last 1-2 years.

If you don't want Muslims broaching the gates of the First World, don't bomb the shit out of their nations. It's really quite simple.

Just because America likes playing target practice in the sandbox doesn't mean Europe has to allow in every brown skinned man under the sun. They can easily go to other Muslim countries and European countries can very easily decide to defend their borders (but choose not to because they've grown fat, lazy, and degenerate).

Post: #27

(05-12-2017 03:41 PM)Samseau Wrote:  NATO should be disbanded, all we're doing is funding the defense of Europe's Islamization.

Is Europe becoming more Islamic, or is Europe de-Islamifying the Muslim immigrants as the Muslims discard their own culture and adopt European cultures? In particular, what are the children of Muslim immigrants doing -- are they still wrapping their heads up in towels, or are they trying to fit in with their European comrades, with their girls becoming Euro-style hoes?

From what I've seen, a lot of the Muslim immigrants to the U.S., even if they're strict parents who set a 9 PM curfew, still have daughters whose legs fly open for every American guy, right up till they have to be on their way in order to get home by 9 PM.

Saying the Muslims are going to Islamify Europe is like saying that if you send an away team over to the Borg spacecraft, they'll assimilate the Borg into Federation culture. It's probably not going to happen; if anything, it'll be the reverse.

It's the same way in the U.S.; the Mexicans' kids end up speaking English without even a Mexican accent. Our melting pot is an unstoppable force of cultural domination, Americanizing everyone who comes to our shores within 1-2 generations.

Post: #28

Jean, it depends on the density of the immigrant population. The Mexican kids
growing up in Houston or east LA aren't gonna assimilate, they're instead going
to reshape the local culture into a norteño blend.



The ones growing up in say, Philadelphia or Portland where they will remain a
minorty will assimilate though. But the culture of the entire Southwest is going
to shift towards a chicano blend, just as Samuel Huntington predicted. You get
the same dynamic with (Asian) Indians in parts of Toronto. Good people by and large,
hard-working low-crime community, but the shear density in parts of the GTA
overwhelms the local culture.

Muslims in N. America are fairly well integrated, their numbers are relatively small
and they have higher rates of educational attainment than the general population,
like many of the Asian communities. But problems start festering when you have
a combination of those three factors: very high local densities of uniform communities,
low educational attainment and a stagnant economy. This is the case in many parts
of Europe (burbs of Paris, Brussels, Birmingham or Berlin).

The problem as it relates to NATO/geopolitics is that globalist leaders like Hollande/Macron
play a double game in which they keep their minorities down and foster ethnic strife
to serve their domestic agendas. EXACTLY like the left has done in the US, shipping
huge numbers of Southern Blacks into cities like Philly or Chicago, creating racial strife,
urban flight of whites and the destruction of distinct ethnic European identities. All the while
destroying the social fiber of transplanted Black communities through "Great Society"
weaponized welfare...

E Michael Jones has done a superb job documenting this historic chapter in
the US, which he has had a first hand experience as an Irish-German Catholic
from Philly. He's one of the most underrated American intellectuals today, Temple U.
academic who's been booted out of Notre Dame:




Doctor E. Michael Jones discusses his book The Slaughter of
Cities: Urban Renewal As Ethnic Cleansing. How the decline of
America's cities and the rise suburbia in the postwar period was
part of a vast and covert social engineering scheme.
Dr. Jones' thesis: "What began as the World War II intelligence
community's attempt to solve America's 'nationalities problem' and
provide workers for the nation's war industries degenerated by
the early postwar period into full-blown ethnic cleansing."

Post: #29

(05-12-2017 06:54 PM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  US has a double edged sword to deal with NATO and the EU countries. If you break up NATO and disolve most of the European military unity you're just creating a vacuum for other entities to take its place, either to counter US or RU perceived or actual aggression.

Eastern Europe see's NATO as a world of good and protects them. Western Europe see's NATO as a burden but Britain likes NATO because we do not think like the Europeans and we are a long standing ally.

Joint military alliances are not bad in themselves. It is comparable to a central bank - if it is publicly owned and scrutinized offering interest-free money then it serves the common good, if it is is private, secretive and supports the usury globalist elite scam, then it is stifling.

The same goes for military unions. If Europe had them in the year 1000, then the Muslims would never have taken Constantinople and maybe would have been crushed completely in one of the crusades.

Either way - if NATO was not led by traitors, then it would just fulfill the overall wishes of the people. Generals in the West don't act in a vacuum bombing people on their own whim.

Post: #30

I just believe that a whole lot of dollars could be saved if the United States didn't have such a hard on for the number of Abram tanks they have currently.

What perceived foe could take on the US and NATO for an extended period of time over different terrains against the combined air, land and sea forces? Long range tactical weapons such as surface to surface missiles do a lot of damage and you can volley them indefinitely as long as you have supplies.

Carrier battlegroups are basically their own rolling armadas with long range abilities.

Nukes makes it impossible to wage conventional warfare where you would need 1000+ MBTs on any side and I doubt any non-nuclear capable country would handle NATO let alone US aggression.

Tanks do well in urban terrain to act as deterrent and protection for soldiers but you don't need hundreds of them per urban area do you?

Those tanks cost way too much in logistics, repairs and shipping. The only problem are the generals for the Armour brigades because they love their precious tanks.

Post: #31

< Tanks are still essential when you wage a ground attack. Boots on the ground against ISIS would instantly mean tanks on the ground.

As for the US - it is not the country of Americans, but it is the country of the globalists. They own it and use it as they see fit. It is not up to any average American of how the state money is being spent.

Post: #32

Unless if there are significanr advances in anti-missle technology, from what I have read carrier groups will be obsolete in our lifetime.

Post: #33

(05-15-2017 08:59 AM)Repo Wrote:  Unless if there are significanr advances in anti-missle technology, from what I have read carrier groups will be obsolete in our lifetime.

Already are - lasers and phasers are already being used to shoot down missiles. Western forces have those weapons, but are not going to roll them out.

There are other technological marvels out there that Darpa-like contractors are not going to roll out en masse. The globalists are not dumb - technological superiority is always an edge that you keep to yourself.

It is rather missiles that will be obsolete.



What you see in trade shows and in public demonstrations is usually a few decades behind the stuff they are already working on right now.

Post: #34

Carrier groups are tools of empire. They don't exist to do battle with other nuclear armed nations. They exist to provide roving air bases to project power into lesser armed nations and extract oil democracy.

Post: #35

Awesome. I find the rail gun technology to be fascinating as well:

Post: #36

(05-15-2017 10:11 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  Carrier groups are tools of empire. They don't exist to do battle with other nuclear powered nations. They exist to provide roving air bases to project power into lesser armed nations and extract oil democracy.

America's CV fleet will never be involved in a combat zone. They're billion dollar white elephants that would easily be taken out by a barrage of cruise missiles with multi-mode terminal guidance systems.

The American public's appetite for war would seriously diminish if the news showed pictures of struck aircraft carriers listing to one side and smoking.

Post: #37

(05-14-2017 04:50 PM)Jean Valjean Wrote:  

(05-12-2017 03:41 PM)Samseau Wrote:  NATO should be disbanded, all we're doing is funding the defense of Europe's Islamization.

Is Europe becoming more Islamic, or is Europe de-Islamifying the Muslim immigrants as the Muslims discard their own culture and adopt European cultures? In particular, what are the children of Muslim immigrants doing -- are they still wrapping their heads up in towels, or are they trying to fit in with their European comrades, with their girls becoming Euro-style hoes?

From what I've seen, a lot of the Muslim immigrants to the U.S., even if they're strict parents who set a 9 PM curfew, still have daughters whose legs fly open for every American guy, right up till they have to be on their way in order to get home by 9 PM.

Saying the Muslims are going to Islamify Europe is like saying that if you send an away team over to the Borg spacecraft, they'll assimilate the Borg into Federation culture. It's probably not going to happen; if anything, it'll be the reverse.

It's the same way in the U.S.; the Mexicans' kids end up speaking English without even a Mexican accent. Our melting pot is an unstoppable force of cultural domination, Americanizing everyone who comes to our shores within 1-2 generations.

Wrong, Muslim countries are becoming more fundamental, not less. China is becoming more Christian, not less. If what you said was true, we'd see the opposite.

Degeneracy is unsustainable, religion has been around for thousands of years. The most religious always survive the test of time. Islam is moving into the atheist void of leftist centers and will only grow more powerful as they reproduce and continue to invade.

Post: #38

(05-15-2017 01:34 PM)Samseau Wrote:  Degeneracy is unsustainable, religion has been around for thousands of years. The most religious always survive the test of time. Islam is moving into the atheist void of leftist centers and will only grow more powerful as they reproduce and continue to invade.

Well, that's largely because religious believers have more children, but the point is well taken: widespread secularism can spell the beginning of demographic decline.

Post: #39

(05-15-2017 03:12 PM)Truth Teller Wrote:  

(05-15-2017 01:34 PM)Samseau Wrote:  Degeneracy is unsustainable, religion has been around for thousands of years. The most religious always survive the test of time. Islam is moving into the atheist void of leftist centers and will only grow more powerful as they reproduce and continue to invade.

Well, that's largely because religious believers have more children, but the point is well taken: widespread secularism can spell the beginning of demographic decline.

Couldn't possibly have anything to do with the fact that most religions demand civilised behaviour as judged by an omniscient being who will inevitably render judgement on it's adherent.

Can't say the number of kids has anything to do with why I'd leave my keys in my car while visiting a Christian commune versus putting them in my pocket when visiting an atheist convention.

The ugly truth is that in a Christian society the whole "leave a penny, take a penny" scenario that plays out in millions of different ways ends each day with that same penny in place, while in an atheist society a metric shitload of pennies go missing day in, day out, and it all adds up. More police. More prisons. More insurance. More deaths. More robberies. More rapes. More lives destroyed. More surveillance. More fences. More barbed wire. More substance abuse. More watching your back. More bad debt. More usury. The list goes on and on and on.

No individual raindrop considers itself responsible for the flood. Atheists might not all be murderers or rapists, but all those tiny little pennies taken here and there add up and up and up.

Post: #40

(05-15-2017 03:12 PM)Truth Teller Wrote:  

(05-15-2017 01:34 PM)Samseau Wrote:  Degeneracy is unsustainable, religion has been around for thousands of years. The most religious always survive the test of time. Islam is moving into the atheist void of leftist centers and will only grow more powerful as they reproduce and continue to invade.

Well, that's largely because religious believers have more children, but the point is well taken: widespread secularism can spell the beginning of demographic decline.

Not necessary. The mongols were once close to completely without a religion. They did not stop to procreate because of it. There is no reason to embark on some religion to start fucking and women getting riled up to get married or have children.

Currently in many countries you have multiple factors working against it that work specifically on k-selected intelligent people or they are the results of indoctrination:

+ economics - the smarter the population, the more they will react by lowering the birth rate when times are tough, childcare is expensive
+ attack on masculinity - fostering of Beta mindset - happens even in countries like Japan, of course is rampant in the West
+ feminism and female empowerment, carousel culture and promotion of Sex and The City Lifestyle up to the end 20s for women (21 is too young to get married!) - that is mostly propaganda, a mere 80 years ago 18 year old girls could not wait to get married, if it happened at age 17, then they were happy

A lot of what is happening in the West are tools of depopulation engaged by the globalists. This has started already a long time ago and not since feminism by the way.

If all the propaganda would step back, economic situation would improve, a sausage fest created by immigration would cease, then we would likely see a reversal of demographic trends in the West and North Asia. If in addition you would start teaching Red Pill and Game to men as well as a female rational perception of attraction and fertility, then it would go up even more. If you added incentives like marrying early, extra cash for picking a high-IQ man (positive eugenics), then offering women university education in their end 20s after having had their first kids - then I guarantee you that the fertility rate would be around 2.5 on average.

I don't think that it would reach 4 or 5, because technology, lifestyle, education - all this changes the desire for kids in a sane almost ideal system as well. No reason to overpopulate the planet unless we can have off-planet colonization as well.

Either way - secularization is not evil by itself. The current marxist bent of things did not come by itself, but was created by design. Also I might add - not all religions are equally ethical and there are huge discrepancies.

Post: #41

NATO- "Diversity is our greatest strength"

Post: #42

(05-29-2017 12:25 PM)Samseau Wrote:  Seems to me the spirit of Hitler's European conquest is alive and well in Merkel, she learned it is better to go through bureaucracy and treaties than war and conquest. Hitler is proud right now, minus the whole exterminating native White Germans part.

(sarcasm off)

Honestly, I said in the NATO thread that we could very well see the end of NATO during the Trump admin because Germany is NEVER going to pay it's 2%. Germany insists that "development aid" counts as NATO spending (i.e. paying for rapugees) and of course that's all bullshit Trump will never accept (thank god).

Germany, and other European countries who insist on paying for mass migration with White slave taxes, will create their own military order apart from NATO. NATO will shrink and we could very well see a balance of powers in Europe between...

NATO: US/Britian and smaller allies like Croatia.
EU Military: Germany/France/Sweden and other countries part of the White genocide project.
Russia: The mysterious civilization to the east whose motives and plans are unclear yet always painted as sinister.

WW3 shaping up to be something like the Yugoslavia war, with three different sides battling it out for supremacy.

Still, it also feels like history is rhyming with itself. Hasn't anyone learned that allying with Germany turns out poorly in the end? Thank God Trump got elected, otherwise we'd be defending Germany against Russia as they turned Europe into a Caliphate. With Trump there is a good chance we'll be blowing up the German government again someday.

Wanted to put this here and not in the Trump thread.

What we're seeing here with the forming of a EU army is similar to what the Romans had and if you must, the Nazis.

An army dedicated to the orders of a certain number of elites sounds more or less like a personal protection force with the ability to wage war and mass violence against enemies, both domestic and abroad.

The Nazis had the SS, the Romans had the Praetorian Guard. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Praetorian_Guard

Whilst neither had the ability to wage large scale battles or conflicts, it would be a good idea to give a personal protection force the numbers and equipment to do such a task and then align them with the French, German and other armies.

Afterall, wouldn't it be wise to learn from history. A dedicated army you can call upon to fight your side against another army and not just some blood thirsty bodyguards?

Post: #43

The problem is NATO no longer has a clear goal. Europeans are split more or less on how to deal with the bear and basically everyone here is sick of American (((adventurism))).

NATO should be disolved as Europeans basically have more or less complete military cooperation. There are better ways to deal with Russia than the current moronic globalist shitshow.

European defense should be about Kebab removal first and formost

Post: #44

(05-30-2017 05:31 PM)Nowak Wrote:  The problem is NATO no longer has a clear goal. Europeans are split more or less on how to deal with the bear and basically everyone here is sick of American (((adventurism))).

NATO should be dissolved as Europeans basically have more or less complete military cooperation. There are better ways to deal with Russia than the current moronic globalist shitshow.

European defense should be about Kebab removal first and formost

You're getting high on some excellent stuff if you think a European military will be used to remove kebab.

It will be used to IMPORT kebab, and many of the imports will be encouraged to join this new European military. You are looking at the beginning of the end of Europe and the start of Eurabia.

Post: #45

A weakened Europe and a divided US means means we are at the beginning stages of the unraveling of the Anglo-Saxon/Zionist world order. I don't think anything will "collapse", but the days of high-level Jews and their lackeys doing whatever they want are coming to an end.

I welcome it

Post: #46

(05-30-2017 05:31 PM)Nowak Wrote:  ...
European defense should be about Kebab removal first and formost

You've got a civil war to fight first.

Post: #47

Its organic vs inorganic (forced by globalists) solidarity. I dont understand why the idea of more military cooperation throughout Europe is inherently bad. Orban is pushing for an EU army ,he supports Putin and is doing more to remove kebab than anyone else.

Post: #48

Nowak, if you were faced with a family member suffering from an acute episode of schizophrenia, would it be better to:

A) give them a shot of tranquilizer
or
B) hand them a knife
?

Post: #49

Im not so pessimistic, we should play the long game here


Some structures should be created to physically remove non European criminals/problem makers easier than is currently possible. If that means cooperation on a continental level thats fine. An EU army sounds bad at first but if smarter heads than myself like Orban support it there's potential to eventually subvert it to our needs. EU military cooperation would be a horrible idea pre 2004 expansion. Based slavs could end the poz in western militaries.

Its important to remember at the end of the day the EU will always try to save face. Hopefully this will eventually mean transformation into a confederation of freedom and fatherlands.

Leftism is gay,more and more people are waking up.

Post: #50

(05-31-2017 03:36 PM)Nowak Wrote:  Im not so pessimistic, we should play the long game here


Some structures should be created to physically remove non European criminals/problem makers easier than is currently possible. If that means cooperation on a continental level thats fine. An EU army sounds bad at first but if smarter heads than myself like Orban support it there's potential to eventually subvert it to our needs. EU military cooperation would be a horrible idea pre 2004 expansion. Based slavs could end the poz in western militaries.

Its important to remember at the end of the day the EU will always try to save face. Hopefully this will eventually mean transformation into a confederation of freedom and fatherlands.

Leftism is gay,more and more people are waking up.

Are you on about Viktor Orban of Hungary?

I'm not sure why any Eastern European citizen, let alone a leader of theirs would even hint at going along with such plans at the behest of Western European masters like Germany and France.

Eastern Europe could not rely on the West prior to WW2 and it will be the same in the decades to come and this splintering within NATO will push the UK and Eastern Europe into a corner.

The biggest massacres occured through marxism and communism by putting an army not local to the area and giving it orders to carry out raids and anti-government operations which then led to ever increasing violence and eventually massacres.

An EU army is perfect for that and looking at demographics, who will staff this new army in the future?