Ever since first deployment, I’ve been a sucker for military history. Look forward to reading.
1 Like
Fixed your post for you.
5 Likes
On the bright side, I am really happy to have a real neo-Nazi/real racist on the board.
It draws a bright line and shows our liberal posters that actual conservatives have zero in common with an actual Nazi.
+++
Oh, heck, can’t help myself. Jewish participation in Vietnam was 3.0% of soldiers:
http://www.americanwarlibrary.com/vietnam/vwc7.htm
The Jewish percentage of the US population in 1970 (picked for census and high point of war) was 2.63%
6 Likes
These guys come and go. He’s basically European Raj. We had a guy from England one time while I was travelling on a work trip. I’m literally walking out of the hotel bathroom from my shower reading to see some alt righty claim I doxxed him and such nonsense, immediately flagging in mods to ask how he can delete his entire posting history.
I feel bad for the guy in the room next to me. He probably heard some nerdy kid cackling to himself like an idiot.
Agreed. But the issue of late has been the declining share of actual conservatives.
I’m always flabbergasted by these weird WS alt right types. How does an entire group of people believe simultaneously in using IQ as a measuring stick (by all accounts, a test commonly crushed by Jews), believe they are the cause of societies woes through ‘Jew-y’ acts (which to pull off would require they are smarter than your average bear, validating the IQ thought), not wanting to accept brown people (due to their low IQ and yadayada, making them bad fits for high IQ society), and THEN PREACH ABOUT HATING THE JEWS.
3 Likes
Anyone who questions anything about Jews is a “neo Nazi,” a “racist” and a “buddy of Hitler” in your eyes.
Again, I’ll keep it civil and straightforward.
You provide a link to defend your position there was an “over representation of Jews in the US military 1776 - 1990.”
Said link references:
- French + Indian War - no stats at all
- Revolutionary War - a grand total of 160 soldiers (not a typo)
- Civil War - no records, only one estimate provided
- WW1 - no stats at all
- WW2 - 550k soldiers out of 4.8m Jews
- Vietnam - marginal over representation
- No other wars referenced (ie I’ve not left anything out on purpose)
So your entire defence is based on the above. 6 wars, of which only 2 supports your position. And one of these was in a war literally against Jews anyway (ie of course they would be well represented).
The above, and the basis of all the rest of your statements, are provided from a book by Simon Wolf, a Jew and prominent Jewish advocate. Aside from the obvious and significant conflict of interest this author might have in the production of this book, there are clear errors in his work anyway. Which a cursory investigation shows up.
For example, taken from a Jewish website:
“While Wolf’s book was valuable in the argument in the 19th Century over Jewish acculturation in America, its flaws as a scholarly resource became apparent over the decades…some non-Jews were misidentified as Jews, and Wolf sometimes made mistakes in identifying the units the men belonged to.”
I’ve provided a link, and you have repeatedly agreed, that since 1990, there has been an extreme under representation of Jews in the US military.
So between 1776 - 2019, your strongest defence is WW2 and Vietnam, which I accept as correct.
However, how on EARTH:
- Does this prove your position it is a “canard” and “fake news” that Jews are under represented in the US military?
- Why exactly does my questioning of any of this make me some dastardly monster and “buddy of Hitler”?
I understand why you would attempt to put forward a staunch defence. Yet, don’t you realise that screaming epithets and blindly refusing any and all criticisms, actually exacerbates the problem you no doubt wish to avoid?
That Jews can seemingly NEVER accept ANY negative comments or even factual evidence against them. Everything becomes a “canard” or “trope” by some “neo Nazi.”
It is no different to the concurrent disagreement of why Jews have been expelled from 100+ societies spanning thousands of years. No exaggeration, here has been the extent of the explanation:
- blind hatred
- Christianity
- Jews are superior
Literally ZERO said that Jews could have been in the wrong over anything at all. It is frankly laughable. And screaming Hitler and canard and racist doesn’t add much to it either to be honest with you.
So in this concurrent argument, if you don’t accept that it was the sole fault of the hate filled rest of the world for these millennia long expulsions, you are some kind of psychotic weirdo. Laughable!!
That’s a very interesting chapter in your ongoing thesis on…we’ll get to that in a moment… Since you took the time to write all of that it wouldn’t be right to let all of that effort go unnoticed. The one critique I have, about what appears to be an attempt at writing a book, is that it seems to lack an actual point. I find myself asking the same two questions: what the hell is he rambling about? and, do I even care?
Do you even know what your whole point is? What are you trying to say? Why should anyone care? Why do you care (about whatever it is you are sad about)? Why should I care that you care? Why do you care that I care that you care?
It was off and on until it’s complete collapse in 2000. It was not one meeting in 1993. Talks started, blew up, resumed, blew up, resumed, and blew up for good in 2000.
Perhaps signing an actual official binding peace agreement, charter or something substantive and complete, not a mere letter from a terrorist leader.
Well, you care enough to respond to absolutely every last post I make in any thread I pass comment in.
This is a debating forum.
I enjoy writing and debating. It shouldn’t be that difficult to understand.
For someone who likes debating, you sure have a hard time answering some simple questions, for example: what exactly do you want to debate? I have a feeling you are too afraid to answer. You’ve been afraid of many questions up to this point. Simply asking if you served in the US military threw you into a panic.
Update (which @zecarlo should appreciate!):
Alabama’s Republican Party is urging the state’s congressional delegation to begin the process of expelling freshman Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) from Congress.
Yay democracy! Does this mean we can begin the process of expelling Alabama as a state?
He is also very good at misrepresenting facts and arguments, which anyone can see are false.
It’s not a very good example of his peoples’ “Tell a Big Lie often enough” approach, but he’s got promise.
600,000 lives were lost forcing Alabama to remain a state.
1 Like
Well, given that they love government money, it worked out for them.
I don’t know about that.
I think a lot of the alt-right have simply the SOME of the same short-term agendas as conservatives, but for a different agenda, and so conservatives get called “racist”
For example, conservatives like me support a strong border and reform of the “lottery” approach to US immigration because many of the worst of people try to avoid proper immigration channels (it not being overly difficult to immigrate to the USA), and I think it is better to have skilled immigrants who can support themselves and add to the economy and not be a net drag. It’s not a racist thing, at all. Probably end up with a lot of Asians, in fact.
The alt-right want the same mechanical things (strong border, reform immigration process) because they don’t like brown people.
As a result of the converging issue, conservatives are (unfairly) called racists.
Of course, the alt-right have a high issue overlap with liberals, too, but again the motivation is completely different.
For example the “1% movement” was a non-racist socialist movement – but it had many of the same organizers as the Charlotesville Alt-Right Nazis – for whom the 1% was merely a dog whistle for “da Joooooos.” Same issue; different agenda.
I think the conservative movement is not as good at messaging as the liberal movement – in no small part because the media is largely liberal and does them no favors.
Long way of saying, there are lots of conservatives out there — that are not remotely like our Nazi friend and do not share anything with his overarching agenda. Same with lots of liberals who do not share their hatred of Jooooos.
(A post script to the above – I think a better example on the left might be “normal” feminists out there who want to make sure women get a square deal — they are completely crowded out by the fringe radical man-hating loons who suck up all the air. As a result, a “square deal” feminist probably does not want to label herself as a “feminist.”)
1 Like
I do. The death of fiscal conservatism (to me) means a drastic decline in real conservatives. I’ll die on that hill with a smile on my face
Conservatives have been called racists since they believed illegal immigrants have been good for business when I was a kid.
I wholeheartedly admit the word racist has been overused lately, but a key underlying aspect is the existence of actual racists. And they exist on both sides, but the GOP side has gotten quite a bit louder since America put a black guy in the oval
I think the Dems essentially being the party of minorities eliminates any chance the alt right had of voting blue, but there does seem to be a weird anti Jewish sentiment that the extremes of both of those sets share.
I can’t disagree more. The GOP is the absolute king of branding. Look at what they accomplished with the word socialism irt their crippling control of elected positions
Agreed
Let’s face it we really wanted to keep the Carolinas and Virginia. Anywhere south of that was sort of a bonus.
Name a Republican president who reduced the debt, without using Google. I can’t. Without looking it up I doubt there is one since at least Nixon.
Fiscal conservatism has been dead on the national level for many decades. It’s the same with reducing the size and scope of government. Reagan and Trump did pull back the regulatory leviathan, but did little to limit other government power.
Bush 1 added taxes and Bush 2 added Medicare part D.
So you should have been celebrating for some time.
1 Like
Oh I’m aware. Despite the prior tradition, nobody spends money like the GOP.
Agreed. But at the very least it was still existing at the state and local levels. The concept of fiscal conservatism was a big factor in the grooming of pols from the ground up.
Now the entire concept seems to have been nuked with the Trump rise, yet it still lingers with local herpaderp people talking about how Dems spend so much damn money.
I wouldn’t have been celebrating it ever. When I was younger I was busy being raised as a republican, and then when I got older fiscal conservatism was the only thing I really liked about the GOP.
Both national parties are disgraceful. I would say, the recent proposals by the Democrats are in the trillions and exponentially worse. So it’s like picking a slow cancer vs. a bullet wound. Both suck.
I will say the problem is not the deficit, but rather the spending, which chokes out private development.
The deficit is really just a tax – and a flat tax at that – which, due to government debt being paid back by government fiat money – just an inflation. All (“all”) that happens is dollars are worth less – i.e., inflation.
The people that pay the tax are people with fixed incomes – and people who have savings in dollars. So its screwing the Baby Boomers (who really started this), China, and Japan.
I don’t really have a problem with that.
4 Likes