Tag: war

Eventually, inevitably, the decadence and demoralization of imperial society catches up with the leading military power. As the Z-man notes, the USA is no exception in this regard:

For starters, the sorts of men excited about taking orders from a girl are not the sorts of men you want fighting your wars. That only works in Hollywood propaganda. That propaganda, however, has had an impact on the culture. As a result, a decreasing number of men are physically able to meet the minimum requirements. A boy who spent his formative years playing video games and being asked if he would prefer to wear a dress, is unlikely to have the ability to make it through basic, much less be a good soldier.

Then you have the fact that white guys are starting to figure out that the government is their enemy, so signing up to fight for the government is not in their interests. Part of it is the fact that the public has figured out that the neocon response to 9/11 was a scam. They did not care about keeping the country safe from Islam. They only cared about keeping Israel safe from Islam. Importing millions of Muslims after 9/11 did not go unnoticed. A volunteer army relies on patriotism to fill the ranks. Fighting for strangers does not cut it.

There’s also the fact that whites are getting wise to what’s happening and public trust is plummeting. A volunteer army not only relies on patriotism, but it relies on civic duty. It is why we still call military service a duty. Some still call politics “public service” even though no one is so naive these days. The point is, like patriotism, civic nationalism is a social contract. Both parties have to uphold their end of the deal in order for it to work. It’s why blacks lack patriotism and they have never been willing to join the military.

The black issue is one to understand. We are constantly bombarded with propaganda about the heroic blacks in the military, but blacks have always been under represented in the services. Blacks, of course, are leading the charge against the  national anthem. It’s not just a stunt by coddled athletes. Blacks in America have never felt a sense of duty to the country, which makes perfect sense, given the nature of black identity. If you see society as dominated by the people you hate, why would you feel loyalty to society?

Then you have the much celebrated browning of America. As of the last census, the majority of people under-18 are non-white. By the next census, it will be distinctly non-white. War fighting is a young man’s game. A military built to run on smart white guys with a sense of duty is not going to function when it has to rely on non-whites, who despise their host population. Inevitably, the military is going to start looking like a Chicano version of Stripes. No one says it, but everyone in charge sees the problem.

This is one of the many reasons that Trump and the generals would be wise to ignore the increasingly desperate blandishments of the neocon imperialists to go to war somewhere against somebody. It’s only the relatively small size of the commitments and the caution of the generals that has permitted the US military to avoid a Syracuse-style disaster of the sort that crippled the Athenian Empire.

Trump is why British Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn is under relentless attack in Britain:

“Besieged for four years, Corbyn has been abandoned. Few respected politicians want to risk being cast out into the wilderness, like Ken Livingstone, as an anti-Semite. Corbyn himself has conceded too much ground on anti-semitism. He has tried to placate rather than defy the smearers.”

Cook points out that by conceding ground, Corbyn betrayed Palestinians and betrayed anti-Zionist Jews who were expelled by droves from Labour. Even Tony Greenstein, a Jewish nationalist though anti-Zionist, had been expelled; the same Tony Greenstein who attacked me and Gilad Atzmon for our anti-Semitism (I responded to him here). He was also sent home packing. The late Hajo Meyer, a Holocaust survivor and defender of Palestinian rights, a personal friend of Corbyn, had been denounced. Palestinians were betrayed, and we should care about them more than about Jewish fine feelings.

But why should we give a damn about Corbyn and/or Palestinians if we aren’t British voters? I’ll tell you.

In the British establishment, pro-Jewish forces decided to side with the Washington War Party to push us close to war. The recent visit of the British Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt (the man on the shortlist of Israel’s agents within the British establishment) to Washington where Hunt delivered a speech calling for full-out war on Russia, “has been read as an intervention on the side of the anti-Russian faction in the split and divided US administration”, said the Guardian.

The speech is just an opening, missiles will follow soon. Today, I was informed by my contacts, the Russians have delivered a demarche to the State Department, warning the Americans to desist from their plans to attack Syria. Russian intelligence learned that eight tanks containing chlorine have been delivered to Halluz village of Idlib province where the group of specially trained militants has already been deployed in order to simulate the rescue of the victims of chemical attack. The militants were trained by the British private military company Olive (which had merged with the American Constellis Group.

This explains a lot. I have been wondering why the British media have been waging such an over-the-top campaign against Jeremy Corbyn of late, with several MPs throwing massive hissy fits of the sort that would normally suffice to get them kicked out of the Labour Party. The reason is that Britain has become the favored weapon of the neocons and the Deep State to provoke war with Russia now that it is clear that Trump has no intention of playing ball. But Corbyn, who is far more popular than any of his party rivals, stands in their way, so they are desperate to get him out of the picture before Trump manages to turn his attention to Britain and the three other Five Eyes states.

To date, Corbyn has simply remained passive and calmly weathered the attacks. Since that hasn’t worked, I suspect he will soon take action to expel his attackers from the party. After all, what are they going to do, join the Conservative Party?

It’s not a coincidence that both Trump and Corbyn are under assault. Despite their ideological differences, both men are sane enough to be determined to avoid more totally unnecessary wars that are not in the American or the British national interests.

As the prospects for actual conflict grow, more and more right-wingers are beginning to realize that conservatives cannot be relied upon to fight for anything:

Would conservatives achieve an easy victory against the left if it came down to civil war?  The question seems less absurd by the day as tensions increase between the right and left.  Many conservative writers seem to think the left would fold quickly and the right would triumph. One has good reason to doubt that.  Consider basic issues like political bias in universities, or religious integrity.  After decades of exposés and outcries from conservatives over liberal tyranny, universities are as biased as they ever were….

I am nowhere near as confident as Kurt Schlichter that the right wing could trounce the left wing in battle.  We can’t even unite to keep Alex Jones on Facebook.  It is true that conservatives have more guns and are probably better street fighters.  But conservatives also cave in large numbers even when their most sacred cows are in danger – such as the First Amendment or Christian principles.  The two latter issues sit at the core of academic bias and debates on sexuality, respectively.  I have the war wounds from both battles and can attest to the repeating scenario: conservatives talk and talk about what they believe and how bad the left is.  Then they give up droves when it comes time to fight.

Take the question of defending the gospel.  We hear constant sermons from Christian preachers that speak of standing by God’s word even in the face of popular criticism.  In anticipation of the Southern Baptist Convention’s annual meeting, I spent months searching for people be willing to sign on to a resolution affirming Christian sexual ethics and supporting churches’ rights to offer counseling in defiance of laws like California’s “stay gay” bill.  Almost sixteen million Americans claim to be Southern Baptists.  I could not find a single person willing to back the resolution.  When I submitted it under my own name, it was killed in committee and never brought to the floor.

If you look at the history of ideologically-based civil wars, the odds most certainly do not favor the more conservative sides. The Spanish Civil War was one of the few in which the socialists were ultimately defeated, and yet, neither Franco nor the Phalange were ever embraced by the Right throughout the West.

I’ve been reading James Burnham’s Suicide of the West, and one of the things that is particularly shocking is his 39-question poll which divides the conservatives of 1965 from liberal-progressives. I’ll post it later today, as it shows very clearly that today’s conservatives are yesterday’s progressives.

From the transcript of the Darkstream:

I’m going to talk about Civil War 2.0 and I’m going to talk about the book Ages of Discord by Peter Turchin and what it has to do with the situation that the United States is presently facing. Now this is not a book that I would recommend to everyone, although it’s an important book, unless you’re someone who regularly reads history for fun, unless you’ve got an IQ in the 120 and up range,  this isn’t going to be the book for you. It’s an academic book it’s written in a very academic research style. The author, Peter Turchin, is very intelligent, but he is also very caught up in the mainstream narrative and so you need to be aware of that and not get too carried away by it. You know, not take it as gospel truth.

The way that it’s interesting, what’s interesting about it,  is that it gives you some new tools with which you can analyze the current situation. The thing that I thought was particularly striking about it, and what I’d liked about it, is that Turchin makes a real effort to put things in a proper historical context. He doesn’t just come up with a thesis and apply it solely, or even primarily, to the situation right now, but he also applies it to other historical situations. I believe he had a recent blog post, the one that I linked to today, where he talks about how he applied his calculations to thirty different historical situations, and that is taking a really intelligent approach to it. Instead of just saying, “well I think X is going to happen” and taking shots in the dark, what he did was he looked at the thirty historical situations and then measured their outcomes, and what he came up with should be disturbing to those who think that things are always going to work out just fine is that in ninety percent of the high-stress societal crises there was what he considers to be a negative outcome.

So what he is projecting, using his own metrics, his own tools, is a situation that he considers to be mid to high-level severity, and that ranges from serious societal disruption to full-blown civil war. Now I personally don’t subscribe to the full-blown civil war theory simply because there are no two obvious sides. I think that we’re much more likely to see a breakup and a collapse of the central government as well as the basic societal narrative rather than two discrete sides like we had with the North and the South during the U.S. Civil War of 1861-1865, but what’s particularly interesting about Turchin’s work is that it’s based on the concept of measuring societal stress.

The level of stress in the United States in 2016 was roughly comparable to the level of societal stress seen in 1860, and that’s very, very consistent with observations that you’ve seen from other students of history and military history, where it’s been said everything that’s happening in the United States – I
woud actually push that further and I would say everything that’s happening across the West – is essentially positioning for civil war.

An interesting experiment in applying WAR to war. Which is to say, Wins Above Replacement:

Among all generals, Napoleon had the highest WAR (16.679) by a large margin. In fact, the next highest performer, Julius Caesar (7.445 WAR), had less than half the WAR accumulated by Napoleon across his battles. Napoleon benefited from the large number of battles in which he led forces. Among his 43 listed battles, he won 38 and lost only 5. Napoleon overcame difficult odds in 17 of his victories, and commanded at a disadvantage in all 5 of his losses. No other general came close to Napoleon in total battles. While Napoleon commanded forces in 43 battles, the next most prolific general was Robert E. Lee, with 27 battles (the average battle count was 1.5). Napoleon’s large battle count allowed him more opportunities to demonstrate his tactical prowess. Alexander the Great, despite winning all 9 of his battles, accumulated fewer WAR largely because of his shorter and less prolific career.

However, outside of Napoleon’s outlying success, the generals’ WARs largely adhere to a normal distribution. This suggests his success is attributable to command talent, rather than an anomaly in the model’s findings. In fact, Napoleon’s total WAR was nearly 23 standard deviations above the mean WAR accumulated by generals in the dataset.

There were also generals that had surprisingly low total WAR despite a reputation as master tacticians. Robert E. Lee, commander of the Confederate States Army, finished with a negative WAR (-1.89), suggesting an average general would have had more success than Lee leading the Confederacy’s armies. Lee was saddled with considerable disadvantages, including a large deficit in the size of his military and available resources. Still, his reputation as an adept tactician is likely undeserved, and his WAR supports the historians who have criticized his overall strategy and handling of key battles, such as ordering the disastrous ‘Pickett’s Charge’ on the last day of the Battle of Gettysburg. In the words of University of South Carolina professor Thomas Connely, “One ponders whether the South may not have fared better had it possessed no Robert E. Lee.”

German field marshal Erwin Rommel, nicknamed the ‘Desert Fox’ for his successes in North Africa during World War II, also performed poorly in this model, finishing with -1.953 WAR. This finding disputes the praise Rommel has received as a tactician from modern generals, including Norman Schwarzkopf and Ariel Sharon. However, like Lee, Rommel has been the subject of considerable historical debate. In particular, critics have attributed much of his reputation as a tactical genius to both German and Allied propaganda. British generals reportedly exaggerated Rommel’s tactical abilities in order to minimize disapproval regarding their defeats.

Modern generals performed relatively poorly in the model. American general George S. Patton, described by historian Terry Brighton as “among the greatest generals of [World War II],” accumulated only .9 WAR. The failure of modern generals to perform well in WAR may be attributable to changes in warfare which have prevented individual generals from participating in a large number of battles.

Among post-World War II generals, Israeli commanders stood out. Israeli military leader Moshe Dayan finished with 2.109 WAR (60th overall), an impressive amount for a modern general but relatively modest compared to pre-20th Century tacticians. Similarly, former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon accumulated 2.171 WAR (58th overall) for his battlefield successes in the Suez Crisis, Six-Day War, and Yom Kippur War.

It’s more an entertaining experiment than a serious statistical analysis, but I suspect the incredible tactical success it assigns to Napoleon is much more reflective of the French general’s strategic brilliance than anything else. In like manner, the Israeli generals appear to be overrated due to the low quality of their opposition; if I recall correctly, it was Dayan himself who said that the key to his military success was the fact that he was fighting Arabs.

Napoleon, on the other hand, fought the military creme de la creme of Europe, was often outnumbered, and usually won anyhow. But when you analyse his career, it tends to be his strategic actions that are the more striking and decisive.

It sounds as if the new Austrian government may be following the lead of the God-Emperor in rooting out the anti-democratic Deep State:

The raids came without warning, surprising even the intelligence operatives whose job is to never be caught off guard.

On the morning of Feb. 28, police stormed offices of Austria’s main domestic intelligence agency and carted off some of the nation’s most sensitive secrets in open crates and plastic bags. Top spy service officials working from home that day were greeted by officers threatening to break down their doors.

The extraordinary decision to target the agency responsible for defending the country from a multitude of threats, including right-wing extremism, had been made by the service’s new bosses: members of the far-right Freedom Party.

The reason? Defending the totalitarian North Korean regime from an Austrian espionage operation, among others cited in the search warrant. Critics saw absurd pretext for a politically motivated stab at an independent institution that could threaten the party’s agenda.

More than five months later, the impact continues to ripple across this central European nation of 9 million – and far beyond. In a country whose geopolitical positioning between East and West has long made it a nest of spies – “a playground for all nations” in the words of one Austrian intelligence veteran – the hometown service has been left in disarray.

“It’s paralysis,” the veteran said. “How could you work in such an environment?”

Intelligence services across the West, meanwhile, have looked on in dismay – and have chosen to protect their own secrets by freezing Austria out.

And yet, it looks rather like the duly-elected Austrian government is working with both the U.S. white hats as well as Russia. Is anyone really surprised that the enemies of the people are siding with a shadowy, unaccountable intelligence agency rather than a popular government freely elected by the people?

From a comment on a Darkstream:

“Having a clean room doesn’t matter when Alaric the Goth is sacking your city.”

But, “the most important thing we can do is pray.”

Said totally unironically.

There is nothing at all ironic about the juxtaposition of those two statements. I advised the commenter to read how Fabius Maximus defeated the brilliant Carthaginian general Hannibal, and what his very first priority was when given command of the Roman legions.

From Livy, Ab Urbe Condita, Book 22

Q. Fabius Maximus was now Dictator for the second time. On the very day of his entrance upon office he summoned a meeting of the senate, and commenced by discussing matters of religion. He made it quite clear to the senators that C. Flaminius’ fault lay much more in his neglect of the auspices and of his religious duties than in bad generalship and foolhardiness. The gods themselves, he maintained, must be consulted as to the necessary measures to avert their displeasure, and he succeeded in getting a decree passed that the decemvirs should be ordered to consult the Sibylline Books, a course which is only adopted when the most alarming portents have been reported. 

After inspecting the Books of Fate they informed the senate that the vow which had been made to Mars in view of that war had not been duly discharged, and that it must be discharged afresh and on a much greater scale. The Great Games must be vowed to Jupiter, a temple to Venus Erycina and one to Mens; a lectisternium must be held and solemn intercessions made; a Sacred Spring must also be vowed. All these things must be done if the war was to be a successful one and the republic remain in the same position in which it was at the beginning of the war. As Fabius would be wholly occupied with the necessary arrangements for the war, the senate with the full approval of the pontifical college ordered the praetor, M. Aemilius, to take care that all these orders were carried out in good time. 

After the various obligations towards the gods had thus been discharged, the Dictator referred to the senate the question of the policy to be adopted with regard to the war, with what legions and how many the senators thought he ought to meet their victorious enemy… 


From Plutarch, Fabius

The first solemn action of his dictatorship was very fitly a religious one: an admonition to the people, that their late overthrow had not befallen them through want of courage in their soldiers, but through the neglect of divine ceremonies in the general. He therefore exhorted them not to fear the enemy, but by extraordinary honour to propitiate the gods. This he did, not to fill their minds with superstition, but by religious feeling to raise their courage, and lessen their fear of the enemy by inspiring the belief that Heaven was on their side. With this view, the secret prophecies called the Sibylline Books were consulted; sundry predictions found in them were said to refer to the fortunes and events of the time; but none except the consulter was informed. Presenting himself to the people, the dictator made a vow before them to offer in sacrifice the whole product of the next season, all Italy over, of the cows, goats, swine, sheep, both in the mountains and the plains; and to celebrate musical festivities with an expenditure of the precise sum of 333 sestertia and 333 denarii, with one-third of a denarius over. The sum total of which is, in our money, 83,583 drachmas and 2 obols. What the mystery might be in that exact number is not easy to determine, unless it were in honour of the perfection of the number three, as being the first of odd numbers, the first that contains in itself multiplication, with all other properties whatsoever belonging to numbers in general. 

In this manner Fabius, having given the people better heart for the future, by making them believe that the gods took their side, for his own part placed his whole confidence in himself, believing that the gods bestowed victory and good fortune by the instrumentality of valour and of prudence; and thus prepared he set forth to oppose Hannibal, not with intention to fight him, but with the purpose of wearing out and wasting the vigour of his arms by lapse of time, of meeting his want of resources by superior means, by large numbers the smallness of his forces. With this design, he always encamped on the highest grounds, where the enemy’s horse could have no access to him. Still he kept pace with them; when they marched he followed them; when they encamped he did the same, but at such a distance as not to be compelled to an engagement and always keeping upon the hills, free from the insults of their horse; by which means he gave them no rest, but kept them in a continual alarm. 

Some will consider this missive to be overly optimistic. And perhaps it is. On the other hand, it fits the observable evidence considerably better than virtually every other interpretation of current events over the last few months that I’ve seen. It answers the two primary doubts that Q skeptics have.

1. Why isn’t anything substantive seen to be happening?
2. Why isn’t the President acting more openly?

The answer is straightforward. The control of the media over people’s perceptions of what the truth is absolutely has to be broken before news of this magnitude can go public. And now we’re seeing the God-Emperor do what he has been doing since his campaign for the Republican nomination began. He is forcing the media to expose themselves and declare themselves openly.

Trust the plan. Recognize the pattern. Shut up and email.

Do you really think we are not in control? We have everything.

• Proof of assassination attempts.
• Proof of murder and child sacrifice.
• Proof of treason and sedition.

Any time we want, we can pounce. Trump can declare martial law. Legally and instantly if needed. Maybe he already has? Maybe arrests already happened.

• Hillary 10/30/17.
• Podesta. Huma. LDR. 11/17.

Catch and release. Of media owners. Of Cabal directors. Less than 100 people. And the 4AM talking point authors.

The media is doing what they are told. And they are told to attack Trump. And the lemmings follow blindly. Along with Congress and the world. Why? It’s actually quite simple. Genius. Elegant. Foolproof.

The current battle is against the media.

• Step 1: Force media to destroy themselves.
• Step 2: Expose media as the people’s enemy.
• Step 3: People blame media for the coverup.
• Step 4: Media is destroyed and replaced. Arrests are easy. Institutions are not.

Faith in the media must be destroyed.

Trump lets them live in jail, if plan works. Otherwise their sentence is death. Military tribunals already held. They are working hard for Trump. To save their own lives, and their kids. Jail better than hanging to most. Others have already chosen hanging. Explains suicide weekend option.

In exchange, they destroy the media for us. On purpose and on schedule. On time and under budget. Trump style. They are forced to corner themselves. They are forced to turn on themselves. More efficient. Saul Alinsky style. I think we are ahead of schedule.

Mid terms are not at risk. They never were at risk. 70{8359bd26b913e24a7303d212a23546aa4fafa0cfcdec25c849ef881c8a4ae759} conservative / 30{8359bd26b913e24a7303d212a23546aa4fafa0cfcdec25c849ef881c8a4ae759} liberal = True. We would never leave it to chance. The only risk left is economic. From normies freaking out too much. Or rogue operators. The 4-6{8359bd26b913e24a7303d212a23546aa4fafa0cfcdec25c849ef881c8a4ae759}.

We fought the real war in 2017. Trump at CIA on day fucking 1. Battle started that morning. Last major battle was Vegas 10/17. SA government overthrown weeks later. Then Q starts posting 10/28/17.

This battle is now about minds. Slowly awakening the masses. To break the media hypnosis. Relax. Be a warrior not a worrier. Justice has already been served.

You just don’t know it yet.

Right, because trying to kill people on Westminster Bridge is just something that the British people have always done. It’s part and parcel of living in London, after all.

A Sudanese immigrant known to police is thought to be behind another terror attack on Westminster after ploughing his car into 15 cyclists outside Parliament.

Salih Khater, 29, veered off the road careering into pedestrians and cyclists at Parliament Square, after spending the night cruising around London.

There were screams as the Ford Fiesta mounted the pavement and mowed people down at up to 50mph at 7.37am.

In a chilling echo of Khalid Masood’s murderous rampage on Westminster 17 months ago, the driver, from Birmingham, sped towards the Palace of Westminster – narrowly missing two police officers guarding the access road who jumped out of his path. He then smashed into a security barrier outside Parliament.

Despite hitting at least 15 cyclists and pedestrians during rush hour, no one was killed with only one female cyclist seriously injured.

Everything across the West is now just a prelude to war. In the extremely unlikely chance you haven’t already gunned up, I suggest you do so now.

Diversity + Proximity = War.

Declare a draw and go home. That’s the only serious option in Afghanistan:

The Taliban is on the verge of dramatically expanding its control over southern and eastern Afghanistan in a surprise offensive that has caught Afghan and American forces off guard and thrown a vexing new wrench into the Trump administration’s strategy for ending the nearly 17-year-old war there.

The Afghan Defense Ministry said Monday a Taliban assault on the city of Ghanzi — a key provincial capital linking other areas under the Islamic militant group’s control just 75 miles southeast of Kabul — has killed roughly 100 Afghan security forces and some 20 civilians over the past three days.

While the Afghan forces, backed by U.S. and NATO advisors, claimed Monday night to have retained control of central Ghanzi, local reports indicated Taliban fighters still held pockets of the city and had simultaneously swept in and taken over most of the surrounding province’s rural areas.

Analysts said the development has underscored the Taliban’s capability for a resurgence in Afghanistan and will likely increase the group’s political leverage over peace talks with U.S. officials that the Trump administration has quietly been trying to get off the ground.

Surprising? Who is actually surprised? The Taliban was always going to win, because the Taliban only has to outlast the USA, which was never going to stay permanently in the Graveyard of Empires. The God-Emperor should point out that the Afghan Occupation has served its purpose and bring the troops home. They’d be put to much better use on the southern border… or the western one once California secedes.