The Moron Party

In "news" from Iraq, the left-wing goes to extraordinary lengths to provide what can only be described as entertainment. They don't have a single example of Americans violating the security agreement. Even if they did have a single example, the proper process is for that violation of orders to be reported to the military justice system for a court martial or whatever. And thus, the violation of the law by a rogue soldier would be irrelevant. It's the same as if a car gets a flat tyre. You don't say the car is bad. It's quite normal for cars to get flat tyres - these things don't perfectly smoothly. So long as you don't insist on keeping the flat tyre because flat tyres aren't that bad, then there's nothing wrong with the system (unless you have technology better than tyres in every aspect and refuse to use it).

Anyway, in this case they don't have so much as a flat tyre. They have nothing at all other than an alleged *get this* ***EMAIL***. That's it. No Wild West Shootout in Downtown Baghdad. NOTHING. Just a friggin unsourced email, which doesn't even say that they are about to violate the policy anyway. A single guy is unlikely to be able to violate the policy on his own authority even if he wanted to. He would be required to coordinate troop movements, and be told "can't you read the SOFA, moron?". They go further and claim that "US commanders are frustrated by the new rules". Really? Is this commanders, plural, as in 2, or a majority, or a vast majority or what? Any poll done on US commander attitudes towards the SOFA? Just 19 days on, they've managed to do a survey to find out frustration level? Really? And all this is non-event is supposedly causing "tension". Examples of tension please? Measured how? ie some sort of measurable increase in tension or is it just the normal tension and this is irrelevant? Does anyone on the left-wing have any idea at all of the scientific process?

Moving on from the morons at the BBC to the morons of Baghdad who think that "Baghdad's sovereignty and independence had been recovered" because US troops have moved a few km. It would take all of about 10 minutes for those US troops to come back. If you believe that the US troops in Baghdad were causing some sort of violation of the independent actions of the Iraqi politicians, then you are a moron. If you think that that was happening, but stopped when the US troops moved a few km, then you're also a moron. Get this. EVEN IF THE TROOPS PULL OUT ALL THE WAY BACK TO KUWAIT, IT DOESN'T MAKE A SPIT OF DIFFERENCE. THEY CAN BE BACK AT ANY TIME.

If your definition of "independence" is "not being able to have committed US troops and US politicians and US populace enforce their will on the Iraqi people", then that was lost a long long time ago. If you genuinely want to protect against that, you either need to join NATO (and kick the US out), and get all those Stealth Bombers out of range of Europe (and Iraq). Assuming you want to close down the US's options to use conventional force to impose its will. If you want to try the nuclear route, you have a bit more of a problem. If e.g. the US wanted to say ban headscarf-wearing in Iraq, and was prepared to nuke Iraq if required, then the European members of an American-less NATO would probably be unwilling to commit suicide in the face of US threats, especially if the American have a reasonable reason for wanting to do such a thing. Note that the Europeans have been cajoled into making Czechoslovakia give up some of its territory to Hitler, so there is a limit to what they are willing to do for their allies.

Ensuring that there are constraints on US power is a somewhat quaint objective, given that the US is the greatest source of good in the world today, even on a per-capita basis. It's something I support doing after the war against the non-666 forces has been won, and purely as an amusing testament to how seriously we safeguard freedom and human rights, not because I think there's the slightest threat.

But that's the start of what you need to do to maintain true independence. There's also the economic factors. Even without the threat of Stealth Bombers, what are you going to do about the US putting unilateral trade sanctions on you, thus lowering your standard of living?

Anyway, enjoy your party you ungrateful guttersnipes. Let's hope you get what you so rightfully deserve at the appropriate time. And please be aware that what I think about you doesn't apply to all Iraqis. Especially not the 0.3% of Iraq that voted for Mithal Al Alusi.




Russian History

I read today that Russia is busy lying about its history as usual. Specifically:

This is what appears to anger today's Russian historical establishment: ... any suggestion that Stalin's Soviet Union and Nazi Germany were anything but complete opposites and bitter enemies.

Hah. What a joke. It's not unusual for two evil bastards to have a falling out. Thieves betray each other trying to get a bigger share of the spoils etc etc.

The Chinese are often heard to claim that Mao liberated China from the Japanese. All he did was replace a Japanese dictator with a Chinese one (ie himself). Unless you're a racist, that is not a good thing in and of itself.

So too the Baltics were hardly better off under Stalin's sadistic Communist regime than they were under Hitler's sadistic Socialist regime. Regardless, let's be more specific about the nature of these two sadistic regimes:

As usual, message 666 provides the basis for these comparisons.

I am AGAINST racism.
I am AGAINST sexism.
I am AGAINST religious discrimination.
I am AGAINST dogma.
I am AGAINST subjugation.
I RESPECT INDIVIDUALS who VOLUNTARILY donate to COMPLETE STRANGERS (ie different race, different sex, different religion, different nationality) using their OWN HARD-EARNED MONEY.
I will FIGHT using my BRAIN subjugation of ANY HUMAN.

I am AGAINST nationalism.
I am AGAINST non-humanist behaviour.

Racism - The Russians are (and presumably were) just as racist as the Nazis. The ONLY reason the Russians were so upset about Serbia being bombed is because the Serbs were Slavic people and the Russians are racist to the core.

Sexism - I'm not aware that Russians and Germans were any different in attitudes towards women, so no comment.

Religious discrimination - well, the commies were destroying churches and the Germans were gassing Jews. Ok, I'll give the commies credit for being less of religious bigots than the National Socialists.

Dogma - communism was an even more extreme dogma than Nazism. The Nazis only really had Mein Kampf, and although it was held up as the way forward, and Hitler was a hero, he wasn't claiming to be infallible. Whereas Marx was supposedly infallible and every word in his stupid book was precious and infallible.

Subjugation - both of them were dictatorships who sought to have total control over the population and eliminate dissent.

Donating to strangers - give me a break on either of them. They were both pillagers. Both at an individual level and national level.

Nationalism - both were equally nationalist, and you'll be hard-pressed to find anyone more nationalist than a Russian today.

Non-humanists - Neither Hitler nor Stalin made any attempt to govern according to how they would wish to be ruled themselves if they weren't in power.

So yes, one evil prick defeated another evil prick, after they jointly started a crime wave. And yes, it is good that they did that, because it allowed the backbone of the free world - the Anglophones - to recover from their own abject stupidity and sloth which "Peace in our Time" Chamberlain epitomized.

The Russians like to lie about their history as much as the Arabs do. It's difficult to move forward together when one party likes to lie through their back teeth. No-one is asking for compensation from the Russians for starting WWII. We do expect them to make some effort to do good deeds in general to show that they are different. And let's be clear - they withdrew from Eastern Europe - a very good deed indeed. And they allow US weapons to be shipped across their territory to Afghanistan - very good. Thankyou Russia. I hope we will be solid allies in the future. But please, acknowledge why we weren't allies in the past - it was because of your old dictator's crimes.




Mixed Bag on the Left

I saw an article on the left-wing BBC about Obama's hopes for Africa. I wasn't going to read it because I was pretty sure it was more of the same nonsense that ultimately ensures that the Africans remain backward, innocent whites remain hated, and so conflict and poverty is perpetuated by the very same people who pretend to want to end these things.

But I decided to read it anyway.

Sure enough, Obama and the BBC managed to go back to the 17th friggin century to say something nasty about whites. Not mentioned was the more recent (only one friggin century old) ending of the slave trade by the Royal Navy. Nor the shitload of whites who died ending slavery in North America. Nor the huge amounts of direct and indirect foreign aid to Africa being completely squandered by Africans.

On the other hand, he did come out with a very clear statement:

"Development depends upon good governance," Mr Obama told legislators. "That is the ingredient which has been missing in far too many places, for far too long.

"And that is a responsibility that can only be met by Africans."

Not sure I can ask for much more than that. Well, I can ask for an ending of the racism against whites - the same racism that causes hundreds of thousands of Tutsis to be massacred by their neighbours - but let's not try Mission Impossible.

And there's much more to be lauded in there as well.

And quite frankly if the likes of Geldoff could get behind Obama's message, it would go a long way towards ending singer scams too.

And now we have it from the Kenyan PM too:

Speaking to the BBC, Kenyan Prime Minister Raila Odinga welcomed the speech.

"We should stop blaming colonialism for our under-development. We really need to address issues of governance, because I believe it is the mediocrity with which Africa has been governed that is responsible for our backwardness today."

To quote someone else - Holy personal responsibility, Batman!

But then we have this sick quote:

"Ghana's achievements were less dramatic than the liberation struggles of the 20th Century but would ultimately be more significant."

I was wondering how Ghana's economic reforms could be more important than the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe.

Then I realised what he was calling a "liberation struggle". ie some black dictator replacing good governance and human rights with hell on earth.

Yeah. Right Obama. Time to like - die or something.


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?