I did not like this war one bit, but I think we should go easy on the guys who fought over there. Face it, they are just pawns. Their country called, they answered. If if their country called them for a dubious thing, the fact that they answered is still worth something. My main beef against the US military is that we hardly ever fight on the side of the good guys anymore. We are always for the bad guys or at least fighting for some dubious cause.
And we commit war crimes like crazy, though we seem to be getting a lot better about this. The Rules of Engagement in Iraq were much stricter than in Vietnam and certainly than in Korea, where I wonder if we were even following any rules at all. We need to knock it off with the White Phosphorus already though. We no longer use napalm (thank God!) and we have ended the use of cluster bombs (good show!). We really need to end the use of all depleted uranium ammunition though. The stuff is toxic as Hell and it’s got to go.
Almost no enemy POW’s were executed in Iraq or Afghanistan. I am afraid that we did this in Vietnam (CIA’s abominable Phoenix Plan), and in Korea, it looks like there were some terrible cases of this and even of US troops executing hundreds of South Korean civilians. My Lai was not the only massacre in Vietnam. There were many more smaller ones. It was fairly common for US soldiers to rape and murder young Vietnamese women villagers, especially in enemy territory. No, I do not approve of setting huts on fire in villages. Free-fire zones were a complete abomination. Carpet bombing with B-52’s is madness. The use of Agent Orange was an outrage.
US troops were not really monsters. After Tet, severe cynicism set in among US soldiers. Drug use skyrocketed, especially heroin, and I believe ceasefires were often negotiated with the local NVA or Viet Cong. Fragging or assassination of hated officers by those under the command rose to epidemic levels. Many to most of the men felt that the cause they were fighting for was complete bullshit, and they were probably right. We had a draft in the US, and those men were called up and ordered to serve. You can hardly fault a soldier for being drafted into war.
But I will say that the US military is damn good. And I can respect that. The 173rd Airborne was legendary in Vietnam. It has long been said to be one of the finest units in the US military, and I believe they may still exist.
Does it make sense to say that you thought the war was a great big mistake and still thank the men who served for their service? I don’t know, but I am going to do it anyway.
Filed under Asia, Iraq War, Military Doctrine, NE Asia, Regional, SE Asia, US War in Afghanistan, USA, Vietnam, Vietnam War, War
I don’t understand this fetish Americans have with superiority. It’s like Lake Wobegon where everyone is above average.
To give you an example, 90% of Americans state that they are above average drivers. Obviously that is logically impossible.
Fully 25% of Americans think they are in the top 1% of the income bracket. I am not sure, but that may be around $300,000/yr. So full one quarter of Americans are so damn stupid that they think they make 300 grand no matter what their income is. I guess they failed elementary school math.
Fully 50% of Americans are absolutely certain that they will be millionaires one day. I believe 1% of Americans are millionaires. So 50% of Americans are absolutely certain that they will be in the top 1%. Ain’t gonna happen.
We see this in the Game Community where PUA fraudsters and con artists (and trust me, every single PUA guru is a fraudster and a scam artist) try to sell men PUA snake oil that insists that 100% of men can be in the top 15-20% of men (statistical Alphas) if only they try harder. I challenge every one of these PUA crooks to tell me how 100% of American men can end up in the top 15% of men. Is it some magic trick of math?
Christopher: If you hate Democrats so much and you hate Republicans even more, why not just vote Green?
The fact that millions of people vote for parties while holding their noses with a clothes peg is the reason why we are in this mess.
Also SJW’s are not well-meaning. They want to destroy Western civilization just so they can look cool and rebellious. Anti-SJW’s may not always be perfect, but at least they don’t want think Western Civilization is the most homophobic, racist, least tolerant society on Earth when actually it is the best place to be an ethnic minority or gay.
Actually I do vote Green a fair amount of the time. But this last election I looked at the Green platform and decided that the Greens were seriously out of their minds. I mean talk about SJW’s! The Greens are vastly worse SJW’s than even the Democraps are.
Often if I think that the Democrap does not have a chance, say my district is very rightwing (which has been the situation almost my entire life in California, even today), then I will just vote Green because the Democrap does not stand a chance anyway. Or if the Democrap is obviously going to wipe out the Republican completely, I might vote Green. Also it depends on how crappy the Democrap is. Diane Feinstein is a rightwing monster, but I have always liked Barbara Boxer. And I really love Kamala Harris. Those are actual Democrats, not the usual Democraps. We are really growing some fine Democrats here in California.
Your extreme denunciation of SJW’s is interesting. I do not think they are evil poison selling the destruction of society. That’s what Republicans do. I think the SJW’s are just selling insanity. Instead of a dystopic horrorshow, the world the SJW’s want strikes me more as an insane asylum. Never attribute to malice what you can attribute to idiocy. And it’s best not to attribute to evil what is better seen as simply insanity. Many mentally ill people seem evil, but often they are simply insane and the insanity is what’s causing their awful behavior. Their hearts are actually decent deep down inside.
There is now a movement, with an extreme Cultural Left emphasis, to get Black women and Asian men together. Some have said that this is a pairing of the two least desirable races among the genders. Black women are supposedly the least desirable women according to surveys on dating sites, and Asian men are supposedly the least desirable men according to those same surveys.
I would add here that Black men seem to like Black women just fine.
It’s also true that Asian women seem to like Asian men just fine. I just spent several days in Mountain View, an extremely heavily Asian (mostly Chinese) city in California. Most of the Chinese women were quite willingly hooked up with ordinary Chinese men even though it is a truism in HBD circles that Asian men are the least masculine men of all.
As you can see, Black women as the least feminine women and Asian and Indian men as the least masculine men get the short end of the stick. A Black woman/Asian man pairing would be bizarre. You are asking the most masculine women to pair with the least masculine men. Black women probably see Asian men as severe wimps. You are also asking the least masculine men to hook up with the most masculine women. For an Asian man to date a Black must nearly feel gay, as if he is with a man. The people at the far ends of the spectrum are the least likely to choose each other.
The argument though is that Black women and Asian men are both SOL in US culture, so these two most rejected groups will have to hook up with each other out of necessity more than anything else. I am just not seeing it. Black women probably prefer a vibrator over some wimpy Asian guy.
An Asian men probably prefer porn and a fleshlight over nearly animalistic, masculinized Black women. After all, Asian men are encultured to prefer the most feminine women of them all – their own. Why would such men who want the most feminine women choose the least feminine women? Those would be the last men to do so.
Black women are encultured to prefer the most masculine men of them all – Black men. As women choose upwards in masculinity, can you blame them? Black men are like the prize to a Black woman. Why would women who want the most masculine men choose the least masculine men? They wouldn’t. They would rather stay home and rub one out in privacy. It’s better than some wimpy guy.
So this project of getting Asian men to pair up with Black women, even out of desperation, seems like a folly. Charging at windmills may be good exercise, but it never accomplishes anything.
Filed under Asians, Blacks, Culture, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Man World, Psychology, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Romantic Relationships, Sex, USA, Women
I spent a few days in Silicon Valley recently, mostly in Mountain View, where I spent four days. Mountain View was swarming with nerdy men of all races. Most of the White and Indian men there were quite nerdy. I would think that if you had great Game and you went to Silicon Valley, you might be able to clean up because so many of the men were such nerds, and you have to think that those women there are probably hungry for some Game-supercharged Alpha men, who seem to be in short supply.
Even in the Land of the Nerds, I am sure that most women still prefer Alphas. That’s just Mother Nature calling them home. They’re not even thinking about it or aware of it. It’s 40,000 years of evolution talking. In so many ways, we may as well still be living in caves. We are not as different from cavepeople as we think.
Filed under California, East Indians, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Man World, Psychology, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Romantic Relationships, Sex, South Asians, USA, West, Whites
It must be that males across space and time have been specifically selecting for beauty in females. The less attractive females were apparently simply selected against.
We see this trend even in modern times as the Black phenotype in the US has remarkably merged with the White phenotype, but only from the late 1800’s on. The changes in Black skulls in the US from the 1870’s on are nothing short of miraculous. Some it is probably due to diet, but most of it seems to be due to pure genetics. At the same time, a remarkable change has occurred in the White phenotype in terms of selection against archaic features and for progressive features from the 1600’s to the present day such that White people now look more like Black people than they do like their very own Colonial ancestors.
We what we are seeing is a merger of the two races. We have already had the creation of the American Negro, almost a new race among Blacks characterized by more progessive features and greater beauty, fewer archaic features, increased intelligence (apparently genetic) and heavy White minority admixture. Yet US Whites are also creating a new race as they merge together with Blacks phenotypically. It is almost as if we are heading towards the creation of a new Black-White merged and somewhat mixed race here in the Americas. Some it is due to interbreeding, but much is also due to parallel development.
What happened what that after the First Liberation, Black men were probably finally able to be more selective in Black females. They selected for lighter skin and Whiter or at least more progressive features and against more archaic features. Black females were also able to be more choosy about men. As some Black men began to accumulate money and wealth (quite a bit of which could be accumulated in Black neighborhoods among the new Black professionals) women began selecting possibly for the most moneyed, prominent or powerful men.
This type of Black men has always been lighter-skinned and more White-admixed than other Blacks. Hence these men would have more progessive and fewer archaic features. It also seems to be a truism that archaic features as associated with lower IQ’s and more progressive features are associated with higher IQ’s. This is even true across racial lines and within races themselves. Mass Black selection for more progressive and Whiter features may have led to the increased IQ among US Negroes, which can only partly be explained by genetics. There may also have been some epigenetics at work here in the US.
Filed under Anthropology, Biology, Blacks, Genetics, History, Intelligence, Physical, Psychology, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, US, USA, Whites
This is a post from a comment by former commenter, now banned, Trash. However it was so well-done that I thought it was worth a post of its own. For all of his considerable faults, Trash was definitely a good writer, one of the best writers I’ve ever had among my commenters.
Although the Cultural Left flips on this type of thing and screams homophobia and stereotyping and bigotry, I know quite a bit about gay men having spent so much time in LA and Hollywood. Hollywood is gay as Hell. It’s at least as gay as Frisco and maybe even more so.
At this point, I have been around enough gay men that I could almost write an encyclopedia about them, and sadly it would not all be complimentary. There is a serious downside to gay men and especially their severely problematic culture that is never discussed anymore due to fears of being called homophobic. Nevertheless, the arguments are for the most part true, and if you back to before 1970, you can see that many clinicians who wrote about male homosexuality could well have been writing down those observations today. Although male homosexuality is not a mental illness, it almost acts like one. I think a better way to see it is to see male homosexuality as a “syndrome” since it’s not fair to call it a mental illness considering how many gay men are psychologically healthy, even robustly so.
Although the following will be condemned as homophobic, stereotypical and the work of a bigot, bottom line is just about everything Trash wrote below is 100% true about gay men.
Trash: Gay men also seem to adopt behaviors or mannerisms you would see in older women as a result of emulating aunts or grandmothers instead of uncles or other male family members.
They can be quite shrill.
Clothes will be important them, and even if they are not attractive they will be overly concerned about their personal appearance. They make wonderful interior decorators because this is also important. They will become hairdressers more often than straight males, or work in restaurants as they have grown up in kitchens as opposed to underneath a car or building a house.
They show little facility with tools or manual labor. They lack coordination, though of course some like Bruce Jenner defy this general rule. They do not like the outdoors, camping or home improvement because from an early age they gravitated towards the female head of the household.
Although gays work out in gyms constantly, they will generally not be employed in manual work involving physical exertion.
Generally they are more right-sided than left-sided thinkers. They can talk forever about humanities or the arts but do not excel in chemistry, physics or math (There will be 1,000 exceptions out of a billion in the world).