I welcome them to try. I'm sure they'll enjoy the reaction from trigger happy anti-Muslim gun owners. Quite sure they'll enjoy their mosques and madrassas burned down with them insideHmm…
Based on their aliases and rhetoric, I can probably guess which religion most of these hoodlums belong to. (Hint: "Allahu Akbar!", "Free Palestine!", and "Glory to Hamas!" are dead giveaways.) Funny how the press doesn't talk about that, since it'd force certain, uh… "religious communities" to actual deal with their tendency to spit out radicalized fundamentalists.
Hamas Launches Offensive Against Southern Israel
- Thread starter Marduk
- Start date
Yes, back before the world started proving them right, and proving that Trump's coattails were infested with scammers, grifters, saboteurs, and deep state agents looking to discredit MAGA from the inside.
I'm not too proud to admit when I've been wrong and the people I doubted are proven right, and the neo-con view on Russia, Iran, and the CCP has been proven again and again.
Bigking321
Well-known member
This is the part that confuses me.
What is the neo con view on them that you are agreeing with?
That they are enemy nations that we should oppose?
That's been a key Maga thing the whole time. Especially the CCP.
Or is the view that we need to actively engage ourselves in any conflict involving them even when the US isn't a direct participant?
What is the neo con position that you find so appealing?
Genuinely curious. After the failure of nation building Iraq and Afghanistan were plus the destabilization of the mideast as a whole I thought praising neo cons was well and truly done. It's surprising to see them being do wholeheartedly embraced.
That Iran was supposed to be contained, not bargained with, as Obama and Biden have done. Neo-cons were 100% right on that. Same with deal with the CCP as a hostile power, not a factory and market share competition.
What the neo-cons had as a problem was being lead by Bush and Cheney; the ideology was sound, the execution of it was not.
Bush was incompetent, and Cheney was too hamfisted in his methods for the American people's tastes, and Gitmo+waterboarding+Iraq blew the good will the US had right after 9/11, all because Bush Jr. had a daddy complex.
I can separate the neo-con foreign policy outlook from Bush's execution of said ideology; I can also update to deal with the post 2014/2020//2022 realities that were not present in 2001.
Bush Jr and 9/11 led to so much bad shit it's ridiculous even SNL went "HOLD IT" when people started yearning for him over Trump a couple of years ago.
You know someone is bad when they say hold the phone this guy is just as bad if not worse in comparison to DJT.
Bush wins my award for most Let Down President even Jeb would have been better.
Bigking321
Well-known member
OK. But aren't these just basic conservative and Maga positions anyway?
You were saying that neo cons were correct and the right and Maga were wrong. But what you are saying is a neo con view was and is held by most conservative and Maga people.
One of Trumps big things was taking a much tougher stance against Russia and China.
So my confusion mainly comes to
The entire right "The Iran deal was a terrible mistake. We need to be tougher on China and Russia."
Bacle "See the neo cons were right!"
Why are you giving credit to neo cons for a very mainstream and common opinion on the right?
Yeah, sure. And sorry, i have no reason to have trust in your pet theories. There is one country that's waaaaay ahead of even the worst of Europe in islamization, Lebanon, and it's not happening even there. Even if people won't fight, they would rather leave if forced to than convert.
Unlike a storm, it is not a force of nature, it is a political phenomenon, and if a sufficient amount of people changed their opinions on it to mine, the "storm" really would be scurrying away.
The leftists don't ostracize converts meaningfully, lol, so by your theory there should be many conversions in most culturally leftist places like Spain or Sweden.
So not interventions, interference. Boo fucking hoo, our country is a shithole and we can't run an economy because foreign policy exists. How did America fuck with Bangladesh of all places?
And yes, non-Muslim countries can be third world shitholes too.
It's annoying when people think someone gives a shit about their edgy "lol everyone is assholes anyway so i will simp for one of the real assholes" crap.
TheRejectionist
TheRejectionist
So exactly what you have done since forever.
Except that the Right has a lot of Russia simps in it now, where as the neo-cons never were just 'against the current thing' when it meant giving cover to things like Bucha because they want to not provoke/escalate with Russia.
Add in that the neo-cons were not stupid with green energy policies, like DC is now, and they actually had policies besides 'against the current Dem thing' as a foundation.
MAGA had so much potential, but the grifters and snakes killed it from the inside, and Pence put a nail in it's coffin when he went along with the stolen election.
Hamas would never have gotten the help from Iran that it did to carry out the Oct 7th attacks, if not for Obama and Biden plus other Dems always trying to play footsie with the Ayatollah.
. . . Bacle, you do realize the stated Neocon position on China was that "we can convert China to a western style Democracy by continual engagement and free trade?" Yes? Neocons have been China doves since the 1990s when they allied with the Democrats and Libertarians to grant China most favored nation status over the objections for the Social Conservatives and Unionists Dems, and they have persisted in maintaining that belief that China just needs to be coddled and given enough economic freedom to then encourage political freedom. The only faction of the US political alliances that has been consistently anti-China and seen China as a hostile actor has been the Social Conservatives, every other faction either followed the Neocon/Libertarian line or had their leadership literally bought off by the Chinese... the present right wing opposition to China isn't lead by Neocons either, it's lead predominately by an alliance of, again, Social Conservatives and former Unionist Dems who switched parties with Trump, as well as some more establishment Republicans/Neocons who realized (late) they fucked up.
All the other positions you ascribe them: being more hostile to Iran and Russia, were not "neocon" positions, but rather the broad right wing consensus positions. The entire right wing roundly mocked Obama and Clinton for their Russia reset when that happened, with no spec of difference between the Tea Party types and the establishment types.
Yes, Romney was a Neocon and he has kinda become the "face" of those who rejected Obama's Russia policy due to the infamous debate quote from Obama, but Romney, nor the neocons, were unique in their hostility towards Russia.
All the other positions you ascribe them: being more hostile to Iran and Russia, were not "neocon" positions, but rather the broad right wing consensus positions. The entire right wing roundly mocked Obama and Clinton for their Russia reset when that happened, with no spec of difference between the Tea Party types and the establishment types.
Yes, Romney was a Neocon and he has kinda become the "face" of those who rejected Obama's Russia policy due to the infamous debate quote from Obama, but Romney, nor the neocons, were unique in their hostility towards Russia.
I was thinking less Romney, more McCain and Cheney. McCain in particular was part of opening up Veitnam as a partner against the CCP.
And the overlap between neo-cons and social-cons at that stage is...where was the line between the two at that time?
The Unionist Dems are likely a faction I'd forgot to hold out as distinct entity at that time, that much is true. Likely because unionist Dems are such a vanishing power base these days, compared to the progressives/Muslim Brotherhood/greenies alliance.
Grimalkin
Well-known member
Yes, I actually gave this some thought over my morning coffee and decided that you're actually right on this one. Converting is honestly a suboptimal solution compared to just leaving, so thanks for pointing that out, still think you're wrong on a lot of other stuff.
It's not so much a pet theory as it is what happened in the past when Christianity came here, and it's what I believe will happen again.
I know, I wasn't actually being literal, I was just describing how pointless the struggle to resist it is. The time for people to change their minds was 10-20 years ago, trying to do so now is like trying to reverse the course of the Titanic after you've crashed it into the iceberg.
And yes I'm aware that the muslim diaspora is not an actual iceberg, it's called a simile.
Except that the people most willing to convert are not going to be lefties or left aligned, so ostracization from them isn't really going to matter as much as ostracization from their own in-group. Which is why I said that it's really a matter of timing.
It wasn't America that fucked with Bangladesh, it was Britain, and I think you misunderstand my point in all of this. I don't care that the West fucked over some Muslim countries, the same way that I don't really care about Russia fucking over Ukraine.
The only thing that's annoying me about it is you blaming veritable diaspora of muslims flooding into our culture on their denomination rather than looking into the mirror. Also the inherent hypocrisy of you pointing your finger at Russia when you've been doing the same damn shit for 20 years, well it's kind of offensive but also kind of hilarious.
No, I don't really take stances for countries as much as I take stances against countries, I'm as much in favour of Russia as I am America. I just happen to be against Ukraine and Hamas, not because they're moral or immoral, it's because they're fucking stupid enough to either invade their much stronger neighbour or provoke their much stronger neighbour into invading them.
In simpler terms I actually think that the situation with Hamas kind of mirrors what happened in Ukraine. They're both countries that received training and weapons from their "allies" and they both got egged on to attack/provoke their much stronger neighbour, and they're both going to get kicked in the teeth for it with their "allies" standing on the sidelines providing some material and propaganda support and nothing else.
They were both stupid enough to fall for it, and so they both deserve what's going to happen next.
When it came to China, it was quite bright and distinct. For instance, publications that were much more explicitly Fusionist Conservative or Social Conservative were very much against normalizing relations with China (IE, Washington Times, World Magazine, and National Review), whereas the right-libertartian position, which was supported by Neocons, tended to be espoused by Reason Magazine and other more establishment Foreign policy magazines and think tanks. I'd have to check and see if this was one of the early Heritage/Cato* splits on a topic, but it was long enough ago I don't remember off the top of my head if they did. You also have to look at other issues like Abortion to see some of the divisions of the time, IE, most pro-Choice Republicans likely were Neocons and while there's not many of those, they do exist (much moreso than Pro-life Democrats these days). Romney fit very comfortably into the Neocon mold and basically had to reinvent himself on numerous issues in the 2012 Republican primary to shore himself up with the Social Cons.
That I'll grant is fair, the 1990s were pretty much the last time Unionist Dems had any real factional power in the US, and it was greatly diminished due to Dems being the minority in Congress through most of the 90s, as the Appalachian Shift which began in the 90s GUTTED the Unionist Dem faction going forward. In the current Congress the only person who is arguably an old school Unionist Dem is Senator Manchin... which explains so much of his disconnect and feuds with the rest of the Democrats.
--------------------
* For those unaware, Heritage Foundation and the Cato Institute are two of the biggest right wing think tanks in the US. Heritage Foundation being explicitly Fusionist/Social Conservative in it's outlook while Cato is Hard Right-Libertarian. For some issues there you might think they'd conflict on there is actually agreement, for instance, both are institutionally Pro-Life and Anti-Abortion (when I say Cato is Right-Libertarian I don't mean Right-Libertine, they reject Hedonism and any parts of the Sexual Revolution that fit into that). They're basically the intellectual standard bearers of the Social Conservative (Heritage) and Right-Libertarian (Cato) wings of the Republican Party so their opinions hold a lot of sway on the right.
That's the issue of trying to make historical analogies while stripping them of historical context. Christianity was de facto spread by Rome, which was a cultural, economic and military superpower at the time with hardly any peers, think USA at the end of Cold War.
Plenty of later conversions in Europe happened for... sociopolitical reasons, religious side of it being secondary. Meanwhile, Islam cannot offer superior geopolitical relations and institutions, in both cases the Islamic world is at the bottom of the ranking, with few boons and many liabilities.
doomdoomdoom.jpg
If the leftist establishment sanction's for not leaving their in-group didn't change their mind to join the lefties, what can the Muslims do? Economically they are a black hole, politically they are a loud client minority of the left, and as far as living standards go, without oil wealth they can't make a nice society to live in even in their homelands, it's so bad that they and their leftist simps have to twist themselves into pretzels trying to blame it on foreign interference. The only argument they have is violence, but that's not something they have a monopoly on, any idiot can do it, it's just that most aren't willing at the moment, but that's not something that takes a lot of time to change.
So if you don't care, why do you care about shifting blame for their own failures to western countries? Totally not caring right here, LMAO, don't give me this crap, i can see what you bother to argue about.
Why can't others see said mirror? Why isn't half of SEA trying to move into the West?
Muslims were trying to flood Europe 1000 years ago too, it's not something new and totally caused by current internal issues of it.
>same shit
What are the new states annexed by USA in last 20 years?
Get fucking real, instead of teenage edgy "rebel" shit.
You're so cool and edgy... Like antifa, commies who tell everyone who they are against instead of what they are for. LMAO. So, in other words, you are trying to deceive people who read your post by framing your sympathies in rivalries of your sympathies and then letting everyone guess who you support.
I will guess, maliciously.
Likewise, Russian expansionism in invading Ukraine is provoking NATO, and that's why NATO supports Ukraine, and Russia didn't win the war yet after taking crippling losses.
The mirror shatters on the fact that Hamas is not a country, it's a terrorist organization that took half of Palestinian Authority (which is a kinda proto-country) by force alone and fights mostly through exploitation of tactics illegal according to all written and unwritten laws of war in the name of jihad.
Ukraine is a recognized country, which had security guarantees from both West and Russia, didn't attack anyone outside of Russian propaganda, and is not getting its teeth kicked in.
You know jack shit about the politics of Russia-Ukraine war, go learn the basics before you have edgy takes on it.
SMH...
Yemen declares war against Israel
Real time news brief - Yemen declares war against Israel - Israel National News flashes around the clock are waiting for you on the site
www.israelnationalnews.com
Yemen has declared war on Israel.
Bigking321
Well-known member
What? That's just a right wing bog standard opinion. What does that have to do with neo cons?
I do not understand this at all. You are taking a bunch of common widely held positions on the right and giving all the credit to neo cons instead of the right as a whole.
It seems like it is either deliberately going out of your way to dismiss the rest of the right on principle and claim only the neo cons are actually good or the strangest case of rose tinted goggles I've ever seen when it comes to neo cons.
Most everything you say you like about them specifically is stuff the rest of the right has been doing for decades if not longer.
Well... yeah?
Not sure why you think the democrats being malicious and stupid helps boost neo cons specifically.
Grimalkin
Well-known member
Well the problem is that the Muslims in practice have a lot more in common with the right than they do with the left, as seen in Michigan where the first muslim led city council immediately voted to exclude LGBTQ+ flags from the city.
And people generally don't have to twist themselves into pretzels to come to conclusions that are that obvious, if you bomb a country's infrastructure to hell and incite a massive amount of social unrest within its borders, then it's kind of obvious that people would fucking leave.
You're the one who has to twist himself into a pretzel to convince himself that nothing is ever America's fault, that it's this shining city on a hill that can do no wrong.
I don't judge America for invading the Middle East, I just judge the people that refuse to take ownership for the consequences of that decision, as well as the people who insist that it was some sort of moral war. And the people who point their fingers at their geopolitical enemies and start moralising about things they themselves were doing just a few years ago.
Honestly I'd attribute it to the fact that the trek from SE Asia to Europe is a lot more difficult and lot more expensive than the trek from the ME to Europe. As well the fact that immigration has gotten a lot easier over time, and it's been a while since the west meaningfully fucking around in SE Asia.
Annexed? You don't need to annex a country to absolutely fucking ruin it, if you want an explicit example of that you can just look at Libya.
No, it's really just the fact that you're a team player and you're too narrow minded to be able to conceive of a person that's unwilling to play that game.
Also a bit gullible too, outright expansionism hasn't been in fashion since the earlier part of the 20th century. Did you buy into the Iraq war propaganda hook-line and sinker as well? This snow job isn't something new, our side is always winning according to official sources and a plethora of "independent" media, except that when dust settles and the war is over most of what we were told turns out to have been a lie.
The difference between the two of us that you keep believing them whenever they get into a new war, whereas I tend to look at the old wars and realise that they're full of shit.
If I'm the edgy teenager in this scenario, then you're the kid that still believes in Santa Claus.
Oh fuck off, Hamas has been running Palestine for the better part of 20 years, and it was voted in. To excuse them as just a terror group is an unbelievably naive act of apologia for the general population of Palestine who've been supporting them ever since they won the elections back in 06.
As for Ukraine, if they wanted people to respect their security guarantees they should've been more subtle in their violations of the Minsk Accords. Russia at least had the good sense to mostly stick to using deniable agents and proxies to incite unrest in the region, if Ukraine would've had the good sense to do the same then there's a good chance that this would've been avoided.
Countries violate their treaties all the damn time, and war doesn't really have to be declared as long as it isn't done too publicly and both sides can somewhat plausibly deny their involvement in it. Shelling cities in the region is far too obvious a violation of the treaty, the civilized route would've been to slow roll the conflict in the region using your own deniable assets and partisans.
They escalated too fast and too far, which left Russia no choice but to escalate even harder or look like a chump. As for how the war is going, I'd bet that I've read a similar amount on the issue as you, the only real difference is that you actually believe what you're reading.
Lovely, they just gave their bigger neighbour an excuse to step on them even harder than they already have been for the past few years. All for a useless statement they can't even follow through, did these fucking idiots even bother to look at a map before declaring?Yemen declares war against Israel
Real time news brief - Yemen declares war against Israel - Israel National News flashes around the clock are waiting for you on the site
Yemen has declared war on Israel.
Edit: I'm of course referring to Saudi Arabia.
Last edited:
No, one area of policy is not "a lot".
Again, who the fuck bombed Bangladesh or Tunisia, i don't care for such leftist apologia for Muslim world. Muslims are perfectly capable of fucking up economies and being discontent without le meme western intervention.
Oh, it does a lot of wrong, like not fucking up its enemies properly mostly for example.
You can be cool and edgy by making grand statements of equivalence in massive webs of geopolitical conflicts, but whatever you may think it doesn't make you look smart.
Bangladeshis and Pakistanis seem hell bent on disproving your theory.
Again, fuck off with the leftist apologia for third world countries sucking, you will not convince me of that, just that you are some variation of leftist scum, as that's who believes this crap.
Libya was one of the inspirations for the Dictator movie, you tell me if it was fucked up already.
I repeat again, i can't be guilted into this navel gazing crap, and kneejerk contrarianism is even less convincing than classic leftist bullshit in that regard.
The game exists and is played regardless of whether you play in it or not.
You can just volunteer to be a clownish player who acts as if he doesn't know the game and its rules, so to each their own.
Did you get that line from indymedia or something? Remember, Obama administration came up with "manged decline" strategy, so much winning.
Yet Russia apparently didn't get the message and is officially annexing occupied territories.
I don't believe them, i make my own conclusions. I just don't see the world through completely delusional contrarian mirror.
>running
Not really running, controlling, occupying, sure, but running, not really. The boring and expensive parts of supplying and administrating the place are to a surprising degree left to NGOs, Israel and PA, yes, it's ridiculous that all these parties cuck out doing such work for a budget ISIL and pay for it, but that's what all the deceptions and sneaky strategies of the conflict by various parties lead to.
Fuck Minsk Accords, Russia specifically designed them to play chinese telephone between themselves and separatist leadership and demanding Ukraine pretend Russia has nothing to do with the separatists, yet while making decisions for them. Everyone knew that, even you know that, the larp was mostly for most naive of westerners and Russia itself.
If Ukraine did the hybrid warfare stuff too, well, Russia would create a scandal out of that and use that as an excuse to intervene fully as "collapse of law and order with battles of lawless militant groups engulfing the border region, creating a security threat to Russia".
What treaty? This was not a valid treaty and no one cared about it anyway. Fuck off with the "muh shelling of Donbass" shit, only vatniks care.
No, the invasion was planned for years, considering the scale it had to be, "escalations" were just media cover by FSB, Gleiwitz incident style.
If you don't believe what you're reading, what's the fucking point, read better sources.
Last edited:
TheRomanSlayer
Mabuhay Ang Mga Makapili
I agree with this statement, except that SE Asians would have an easier time going somewhere closer than making a pain in the ass trip to Europe, and that would be Australia. Port Moresby is a lot closer to Darwin after all.
That being said, what's the ratio between Israel and its potential adversaries in terms of a number of ammunition?