Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[Mike]

Not to mention that they comprise 0.3% of the population (a figure that actually seems high to me). But yes, let's bend ourselves into pretzels trying to figure out a way to capitulate to these demands from a tiny fringe group that flies in the face of the vast majority of American's common sense.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Not to mention that they comprise 0.3% of the population (a figure that actually seems high to me). But yes, let's bend ourselves into pretzels trying to figure out a way to capitulate to these demands from a tiny fringe group that flies in the face of the vast majority of American's common sense.

If the numbers are very small (and they are) what's the argument against deciding them on a case-by-case basis?

My point is that if they're physically capable of the job, they're cleared by a shrink, the military brass says they're ok with it (they have already said they are), and the troops they'll serve alongside are ok with it....why should anyone else's opinion matter AT ALL?

[iam416]

Every transgender issue is trivial given the numbers. Nonetheless, that is the current frontier.

I'm personally fine with a non-blanket policy, but I'm also fairly certain that the threshold tests are going to eventaully give way to virtue signaling bullshit. It's the absolute and completely logical conclusion of any "equity" or "outcome-based" philosophy. I mean, I'm borderline 100% sure we'll be making military decisions based on equity rather than, well, winning.

[Mike]

Here's "social equity" in Chinese. Start brushing up.

社会平等

[Tom W]

Just keep giving them the rope and they'll find a way to hang themselves.

Americans aren't as ill-prepared as the rational people of Russia, Germany and China that got rototilled into oblivion a century ago. We saw how that worked out and no amount of propaganda, censorship, cancellation or book burning is going to effectively eradicate that knowledge. Nor are we as susceptible to those supposedly "isolated" incidents that are part of the big picture that allowed those populations to get duped.. For both of these, we can thank DARPA for that WorldWide web.

Finally, Americans are still inherently a skeptical and fiercely independent- leave me the fuck alone, sort of people. We've never really taken well to the idea of playing sheep in the Christmas pageant- even though SOMEbody has to play them. Oh, and we still have guns that we haven't forgotten how to use. All the good luck in the world isn't going to help the fool that thinks that they can come in and take those out of the homes of otherwise upstanding citizens.

Have a bit of patience, gents..

[Jeff Buchanan]

....... why should anyone else's opinion matter AT ALL?

Obviously, I'm speaking from a biased perspective with command experience in dealing with women in the military, gays in the military, trying to teach Marines to be tolerant of any number of things that fly in the face of the military culture I grew up in and still support..

Look, the military, especially the USMC, is a unique organization. There is no right to serve. You are recruited to serve. If I had my way and am true to the classic concept of warrior soldier, women and all the other classes of people that seek entrée to the Marines wouldn't get green lighted in that process. If I'm the Commandant, I set the standards for entrance and it sure as shit wouldn't include recruiting transgenders...... and I'm pretty socially liberal but not when it comes to the unique circumstances that exist in voluntary military service.

Thinking as I think is no different than the thinking of leadership in any other organization that seeks to limit entry - everyone of these under assault from the left's unreasonable demands for equity and justice. Under the law, sure. Outside of it, executing EOs or passing legislation to cancel things I've honored and fought for in American culture to make denying entrance to the military to every swinging dick - some of them surgically elongated clits - unlawful? No fucking way.

What's happening to commanders is that they would rather cave to these demands than stand up to them ...... choosing your battles applies. I was told that when the first female Naval Flight Officer (NFO) was slatted for my command and I asked that she be assigned to a HQ outfit. Nope. The negative press attention to saying what most of the commanders I know would like to say, just isn't worth it. Talk about a distraction to combat readiness. It's monumentally wrong headed but, let them in, press on. If they measure up, fine. If they don't process them out.

[iam416]

I think Geraghty makes some pretty good points re Afghanistan: https://www.nationalreview.com/the-m...t=morning-jolt

The gist is that it's no longer much of a combative presence as a small, non-combative force to support the government. 3,500 soldiers and the last death was in November. He also points out that the likely consquence of withdrawal is the return of the Taliban. I think it goes well beyond likely to virtually certain.

There are arguments on both sides of this, but I do think we need to be clear about what will most likely happen.

[Kapture1]

LMAO


3rAdz3wSyc.jpg

HAHAAA

[Jeff Buchanan]

I think Geraghty makes some pretty good points re Afghanistan......... There are arguments on both sides of this, but I do think we need to be clear about what will most likely happen.

Good read. From the article:

Maybe after the rise and fall of al-Qaeda, and the rise and fall of ISIS, and all of the other global changes in past two decades — globalism, the rise of China, the COVID-19 pandemic — Islamist jihadism is a largely spent force.

This is a credible position to take. I think the American public thinks more in past terms than present and future terms with regard to the the threat of Islamist Jihadism compared to other threats America faces. The destabilizing affect of a few rag-heads blowing stuff up (the Twin towers was not in that category - don't get me wrong) is significantly less than what the CCP is up to.

Not only that but how nations defend and advance the whole of who they are, avoid their countries from being destabilized and collapsing in the face of an enemy has changed dramatically. It's become pretty obvious how easy it is to take out large chunks of infrastructure in the US, destabilizing government in the process or undertake a biologic attack with serious consequences to those on the receiving end of something like that. The risk of exposure to cyber-attacks or biologic warfare and what those kinds of attacks can achieve in the US is high. None of those things involves putting boots on the ground on either side to do combat as we've known it for centuries.

Can the US prevent China from seizing control of the levers of government in Taiwan like they did on a much smaller scale in Hong Kong? While the US remains the predominant Naval Power and US combat troops are well trained, equipped and capable, a dust-up in Asia on a small scale precipitating a large scale Chinese invasion of Taiwan is not something US commanders think they could stop with conventional forces. It may be time to revise and apply the concepts of mutually assured destruction that kept the Russians at bay until that juggernaut collapsed during the Reagan years. What you're looking for is suitable deterrence to buy time for the inevitable collapse of Communism in the face of the freedoms and relative prosperity democratic forms of government guarantee and, most of the time, deliver..

[Dr. Strangelove]

No charges against the officer who shot and killed Ashli Babbitt

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/officer-who-killed-ashli-babbitt-at-capitol-riot-will-not-be-charged/2640213/

[Mike]

Good.

[Mike]

The guy that shot Jacob Blake in Kenosha is back at work today with no disciplinary action. This is why we have due process and a careful examination of the relevant facts.

[Jeff Buchanan]

You mean there still are some rational people that actually follow the law?

Maybe there's hope.

[Hannibal]

No surprises. The two-tiered justice system is in full effect.

It's fascinating what being a Republican shooting victim does for the concept of evidence and due process. Ashli Babbitt was unarmed and not resisting arrest. Nor was she, in any remotely reasonable sense, a threat to anyone's safety. There was no politician being protected. Nancy Pelosi was not directly on the other side of that door.

We don't even know the officer's name who shot her.

The guy who rushed the stage and got just a few feet away from Trump didn't get shot. Not only did he not get shot, but he got turned into a hero by CNN.

[Hannibal]

The guy that shot Jacob Blake in Kenosha is back at work today with no disciplinary action. This is why we have due process and a careful examination of the relevant facts.

What have you seen out of the Biden administration that makes you think that they investigated the shooting of an unarmed Republican with even the slightest attention given to due process and a careful examination of the relevant facts?

You couldn't even trust the DOJ or the FBI to be fair to Republicans under Trump.