Not Showing Up To Riot Is A Failed Conservative Policy

| 41 Comments

Conservatives are slowly coming over to my point of view.

First, the "If it's wrong for them to do it to us, then it's wrong if we do it to them" formulation is less a principle than a tired cliché. This minor disruption was a tactic; shouting was a tool. It is moral for the good guys - and we are the good guys - to use tactics and tools against an enemy that are immoral when they do it. It was immoral for the Nazis to bomb London; it was moral for us to bomb Nazis. Of course every tactic and tool is not acceptable, but the guys who stormed Omaha Beach did not "become what they were fighting" because they used the same tools and tactics as the enemy.

Took them long enough.


41 Comments

Kurt is right of course.

That is if it is not too late already. Saul Alynski is entrenched pretty deep.

Yuri Bezmenov warned us a few decades ago.

A lot of us are coming to the same conclusion,

Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum -- Again

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/369999.php#369999

The Ewok at ace.mu.nu feels the same way, read his May 31 post, "Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum -- Again"

Somehow I tripped the moderation software with a similar comment?

Get moderated, and Now my captcha is a bad street? Scaden calle

"...mostly because they are weak and scared because, in our new conservative world, they have been displaced by more interesting and influential talents who are committed to actually achieving results."

They were always weak and scared. Hence the pan-Canadian Conservative tut-tut-tut default position against meaningful action over the past fifty tears: "that's not the way we do things." Sounds just like something a smug Liberal would say, don't it?

This nails it:
It is moral for the good guys – and we are the good guys – to use tactics and tools against an enemy that are immoral when they do it.

Morals are irrelevant. State motto of NH: Live free or die !
Fight and win or give up and live as slaves.

Why is Trump as popular as he is? To a large extent I believe most of the time he is verbalizing what many people think but are intimidated in saying. Conservatism is fundamentally based on deferring immediate gratification/consumption for future gain. The majority of people in our society have been 'educated' to not do this. Immediate consumption is glorified by advertising and by media (Hollywood).

Conservatism generally does a miserable job of communicating the message to those who would benefit most. What is worse is often a desperate effort to dumb down the message or even adopt 'less perceived consequences' ala progressive thought. Conservative 'light' is the porn of the philosophy and is pretty much standard today.

No, it was not right for the Allies to bomb civilian targets, such as Dresden, during World War II. It was immoral. Should we have lined up civilians and massacred them -- or should we have put Germans in concentration camps where they were eventually murdered -- just because the Nazis did? Never

Craig said: "...or should we have put Germans in concentration camps..."

We DID put Germans in concentration camps. Canadians of German ancestry went to jail in WWII, as did Canadian Japanese. Until 1946, I might add. Lots of people died there. Go read your history, kid.

What do you do when the Germans bomb your cities? You bomb theirs.

War is not moral, Craig. Its war. That's why we don't like it, and try to avoid it.

But for Ghu's sake, if you're IN a war, and guys are doing atrocities to your country every day, don't you think WINNING IT would be the smart way to go?

Talk to an old Frenchman or Polish dude some time about what -losing- to the Nazis looked like. Better hurry before they're all dead.

As Rush Limbaugh always says, "In any conflict, the aggressor sets the terms."

You can't defend yourself with one hand tied behind your back.

Craig is an idiot, and if he were in charge during WW2, the Allies would have lost.
It was fine to bomb Dresden.
It was fine for Darren Osbourne to drive through a crowd outside a mosque.

"...or even adopt 'less perceived consequences' ala progressive thought. Conservative 'light' is the porn of the philosophy and is pretty much standard today."

Exactly, and there is a perfect recent example of this in Canada when the new Conservative Party leader Andrew Scheer whipped his party MPs into voting to support the Paris Accord, but this support did not include, as my local MP assured me, a national carbon tax. Sure, and a certain hot place will freeze over shortly.

Craig, read "Other Losses" by James Bacque.

Sorry cheerleaders, but normal people do not think it is okay to drive cars into people at random. I could give any number of reasons but here's one that should be obvious -- what if the guy is so drunk that he thinks Sikhs are Muslims, or that a convention of bearded psychics who rented the Muslim association hall for the night are terrorists?

Come on, the rule of law persists at the current level of terrorist threat, if it ramps up into open warfare then community leaders will have to declare sides and provide uniforms. Until then, leave law enforcement to the police and justice to the courts. And if you don't like what you see, vote for people who will make changes. But don't mow people down with your car, that is a counter-productive strategy (especially if only one person does it).

Peter, it seems, has yet to understand that we are at war.
Peter, it seems, thinks only the government can decide what is or is not war.
Peter, it seems, doesn't know what the word "random" means.
Peter, it seems, holds great stock in "community leaders".

Still, great job on bringing the "think of the Sikhs or Psychics" argument to bear, just like any good woman screeching "think of the children!"

I'm reminded of the Star Trek episode where wa rock-like alien pitted the Enterprise crew (plus a few historical "good guys") versus a collection of real nasty historical bad guys. The alien wanted to see the difference between good and evil. In the end, good won, but only by being as ruthless and nasty as the bad guys. When the alien noted that there wasn't much to distinguish between good and evil, Kirk explained that it was one of motivation. The baddies had been promised riches and power. The good guys were just trying to defend themselves.

what church do you belong to?

Fighting fair is for schmucks. If you want to win, hit them with overwhelming force.

CT ... extremely well-said.

And I might add that whether we want to "believe" it or not ... we are engaged in a culture WAR. I consider it a Westernized version of Mao's "cultural revolution" ... where the dregs of society will be elevated to the leadership of society. Where the Doctor becomes a Janitor, and the Janitor becomes a Doctor. Where government-empowered busybodies (the MSM for now) snitch on conservatives. Or the Gay Mafia investigates and DESTROYS anyone who voted for (or donated money to) Prop.8 in CA. We are fully engaged in a culture WAR ... whether we like it or not, or whether we recognize it or not.

In wartime, it is counterproductive to KILL the WRONG enemy. So, no ... some angry, drunk, poorly educated, hick who murders a Seikh (mistaken for a Muslim) is idiotic. And killing a peaceful, Muslim (leaving a nighttime prayer service) is also simply WRONG. In war, there is still "right", "wrong", and "morality" ... as embodied by the Geneva Convention.

This is also an asymmetrical WAR being waged on many fronts ... as varied as a Shakespeare in the Park production which seeks to "normalize" and "justify" violence against a conservative President. We need to wage WAR on every front that ATTACKS us. And a little "counter-political-theatre" ... without any weapons drawn except 'words' ... is a pretty effective countermeasure as far as I am concerned. And revving ones motorcycle engine at an intersection of political street theatre in San Fransicko seems an appropriate countermeasure of disgust to me as well (although the white supremacy blog of the cyclist is horribly counterproductive). This IS a WAR ... and unless we want to cede all the cultural territory that our forefathers (and mom's) built for us ... we better FIGHT back.

And the appeasement of the GOPe is actually far WORSE than the enemy. It accepts all deviancy in an effort to ... all just get along (BTW ... where IS instant multimillionaire Rodney King now?). Obamakkare "light" redux is a classic example of this. The Federal Govt. should NOT be in the Health INSURANCE business ... at ALL. The Federal Govt. HAS been in the health CARE business ... for ALL who cannot afford necessary medical care. We are a compassionate culture and will take care of the sick and weak ... as we always did BEFORE Obamakkare. GIVING health INSURANCE of ANY description to "working" Americans is just flat out UNCONSTITUTIONAL ... sorry Chief Justice (it's a TAX) Roberts. No it's NOT ... it's mandated health INSURANCE.

This is muddy thinking. The assholes enjoying the POTUS mock killing are enjoying their free speech rights in doing so. The stage stormer dispensed with that principle and was wrong in the futile effort of trying to alter their attitudes. OTOH, the assholes preventing conservatives speaking on campuses should have the shit kicked out of them as they are physically preventing free speech. Same goes for "environmentalist" blockades. The institutions were at fault for not enforcing civil behavior. We are not yet close to kinetic war so any talk of violence is premature and hopefully preventable. Without free speech however, it's the only thing left. Thuggish behavior won't win a war of ideas and don't think the state and all its force will be on your side if you think otherwise.

I am normally for the civilized approach, but the time for Conservatives playing nice is rapidly coming to an end in light of recent events, including the deepening insanity of the Left. The fight must be brought to them, and we must use as many of the leftists own tactics against them as we can.

It is time for "No more Mr. Nice Guy" mode.

I am mortified some people reading this blog thinks it OK to commit atrocities as long as the enemy did it first.

Are you all saying that it's OK to firebomb Dresden (civilian casualties perhaps 25,000) as long as the Germans bombed (but not firebombed) London? But if the Germans don't bomb London, then it's evil to firebomb Dresden?

Or, to use the modern example, would it be OK for someone "on our side" off a nail bomb in a crowded market place in Tehran because the enemy did that in Manchester?

As Kenji notes, "In war, there is still "right", "wrong", and "morality" ... as embodied by the Geneva Convention."

Dresden was bombed because the allies didn't have V1's and V2's at that time

Craig, please go explain the Geneva Convention to the Antifa thugs, we'll wait until you get out of the hospital to ask how it went.

"It was immoral for the Nazis to bomb London; it was moral for us to bomb Nazis"
oooooyyyyyy. g***amn g***amn g***amn right on.

I truly, deeply wish I had been born soon enough to do my share of dishing it out to the huns. instead Im a pacifist senior hippie. with a peace sign tattooed on my rt thigh and matthew 5:9 added in between the spokes, to whit, "blessed are the peacemakers".
then what I do is steer the conversation what is the difference between a peacekeeper and a peaceMAKER?
well, if you're surrounded by an invading hostile well armed enemy with ordinance raining down on your head and imminent capitulation, call in the peaceMAKERS whose sole purpose is to smash kill and burn everything the enemy has. kill their factory workers who make their weapons. burn their crops, kill their livestock, kill all their combatants with whatever at your disposal (hint: August 1945). they wanna 'fight to the death' to defend the 'dear leader', 'emperor', 'duce' or whatever, well, oblige them!! kill their brats. smash everything they have, turn it all into gravel to use for your highways and cities.

then, THEN you will have peace once again and can go back to running your business, growing your crops, raising your families in a secure place.

right out of the bible. every version uses the exact same word: "peaceMAKER", a very important distinction.

it took me many years trying to reconcile my aversion to violence with the fact the world can by lethally hazardous left to its own. then I realized the REAL meaning of Mt 5:9.

and on July 1, a special prayer of thanks and immense gratitude to the Cdn military.

"It was immoral for the Nazis to bomb London; it was moral for us to bomb Nazis"
oooooyyyyyy. g***amn g***amn g***amn right on.

I truly, deeply wish I had been born soon enough to do my share of dishing it out to the huns. instead Im a pacifist senior hippie. with a peace sign tattooed on my rt thigh and matthew 5:9 added in between the spokes, to whit, "blessed are the peacemakers".
then what I do is steer the conversation what is the difference between a peacekeeper and a peaceMAKER?
well, if you're surrounded by an invading hostile well armed enemy with ordinance raining down on your head and imminent capitulation, call in the peaceMAKERS whose sole purpose is to smash kill and burn everything the enemy has. kill their factory workers who make their weapons. burn their crops, kill their livestock, kill all their combatants with whatever at your disposal (hint: August 1945). they wanna 'fight to the death' to defend the 'dear leader', 'emperor', 'duce' or whatever, well, oblige them!! kill their brats. smash everything they have, turn it all into gravel to use for your highways and cities.

then, THEN you will have peace once again and can go back to running your business, growing your crops, raising your families in a secure place.

right out of the bible. every version uses the exact same word: "peaceMAKER", a very important distinction.

it took me many years trying to reconcile my aversion to violence with the fact the world can by lethally hazardous left to its own. then I realized the REAL meaning of Mt 5:9.

and on July 1, a special prayer of thanks and immense gratitude to the Cdn military.

Would "no truck, no trade" work for you? How about banning the baddies from our country? That work for you?

No cheating on that, or bending the rules for special cases? Live rounds & full loads? We can be sneakier than them, when we do fight 'em? We'll phone 'em just before the blast/attack/invasion/door busting? Give 'em a "fair trial, just before we hang 'em?

No animals were harmed, so you're good to go?

In Justhtin's "military" you'd be a shoo in.

yo, craig. there was a documentary very recent on the history channel regarding the development of incnediery bombs. apparently the practice targets are still out there in the american desert somewhere.

finding ways to burn everything they have with the purpose of ENDING THE G**AMN WAR *THEY* STARTED. that in no way is immoral. too friggin bad for the citoyens of Dresden eh? today's skill testing Q: would said citoyens benefit immensely from a Nazi victory which set up a situation whereby the priviliged germans all had a complement of maids and servants extracted from occupied territories? yep. would deutchland benefit immensely by running thousands of factories in occupied territory, manned by slave labour as the nazis actually did during the war? yep.

the proper calculation then, for the krauts itching for war and all the plunder, is that potential gain worth the risk of things blowing up in their face? well, the germans made their choice known, gung ho for the wermacht.

oopsie.

etc etc.

h-buff ... brilliant distinction. And let me add that WHENEVER I hear the term PeaceKEEPER ... I think of UN blue helmets standing about, watching "ceasefire" agreements broken and/or diddling little refugee girls ... and boys. Therefore, the term PeaceKEEPER leaves a very bad taste in my mouth. The kind of lukewarm commitment that should be spit out.

Whining about Dresden. Pfft. Give us 5, nay, 10 more Curtis Lemays and unleash them to do what is needed.

Dear History Buff and Buzzard: I had figured that the folks reading this blog would appreciate the difference between the citizens of a country and that country's government, particularly when that country is a dictatorship.

But, according to you, the non-combatant citizens of Germany obviously deserved death. Would you have supported a commando raid on Dresden, when a team of commandos pulled out machine guns and killed 25,000 citizens and then quickly left? Is there any action against the citizens of Germany that you would shrink from committing?

Yes, that which does not bring swift and sure victory against an inplacable enemy that wants me and mine dead. You want to give up your wool? Fine. Not so much the rest of us.

I should also clarify my own ... "rules of engagement". If the terrorist enemy is hiding among women and children ... then I will WARN the civilians to the best of my ability (and strategery) ... maybe I'll drop some leaflets explaining how NOT to get kilt ... perhaps a "knock on the roof" like the Israelis do ... then BOOM! goes the dynamite ! Sorry folks ... best not to associate with THE ENEMY.

The idea of doing all you can once embroiled in total war is to reduce the enemies will to fight, to the point where a general uprising of the enemy population could force the gov't out or to settle; or a war-weary PO'd Colonel could launch a coup (von Stauffenberg, had not his co-conspirator's dragged their feet); or the leadership is forced to see the futility of continuing. Even that may fail, as some of Japan's military leadership tried to launch ac coup against the Emperor as he made his way to a radio station to announce surrender.

In any case, once you are in the game, you play to win, quickly, and do all you can to keep the war off your own shores. There are no prizes for second-best in a conflict, except in some socialist dreams.

No surprise that you're the only one here with a brain.

These posts are very helpful in clarifying what a bunch of hypocritical worthless a-holes the right is composed of. It's clear that we can't advances our ideas because you people don't hold to them. You just care about your tribal BS. Have fun getting plowed into irrelevancy. Me and the other people capable of thinking will try to avoid getting dragged down with you.

"explaining how NOT to get kilt..."

http://www.got-kilt.com/

5 or 10 won't be enough. They have millions of sleppers in cells in every country in the world. One good thing; the sunni sleepers hate the shia sleepers, so it is not a unified front. But neither is our side.

"There are no prizes for second-best in a conflict, except in some socialist dreams."

Bingo! You fight to win and until the other guy says uncle, especially when the other is out to make a slave of you or exterminate you, which is what we are facing now. The sooner we realize this the smaller the eventual butcher's bill will be.

Well put.

Anyone who argues for some semblance of humanity in a total war scenario should investigate some history. Whether the massive bombings of WW II or the mass killings of Attila the Hun the reality is prevailing over the adversary. Failure to do so means defeat and elimination of the values being defended.

Food, clothing and shelter are the fundamentals of life. Subjective valuations of ethics and process always become secondary when the fundamentals are threatened. Sorry but there are no inherent rights. Biological necessities will always trump.

"What do you do when the Germans bomb your cities? You bomb theirs.

When did the Germans bomb Canadian cities?

Who declared war on whom? Canadians or Germans?

"The world will note that the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, a military base. That was because we wished in this first attack to avoid, insofar as possible, the killing of civilians."
Harry S Truman, August 9, 1945
https://mises.org/library/harry-truman-and-atomic-bomb

“KETSO GO” (Decisive Operation:) proclaimed Japan must fight to the finish and choose extinction rather than surrender. “Ketsu Go will be the fundamental policy to be followed henceforth in the conduct of the war”. Emperor Hirohito, June 8, 1945

Bill Whittle’s response to Jon Stewart on the atom bombs:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylMbvf3sn_g

Leave a comment

Archives

October 2017

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31        

Recent Comments

  • rmgk: “KETSO GO” (Decisive Operation:) proclaimed Japan must fight to the read more
  • Rizwan: "The world will note that the first atomic bomb was read more
  • Rizwan: "What do you do when the Germans bomb your cities? read more
  • CT: Well put. Anyone who argues for some semblance of humanity read more
  • Ken Deplorable White Trash (Kulak): "There are no prizes for second-best in a conflict, except read more
  • Kevin: 5 or 10 won't be enough. They have millions of read more
  • Edward Teach: "explaining how NOT to get kilt..." http://www.got-kilt.com/ read more
  • UnMe: No surprise that you're the only one here with a read more
  • Rmgk: The idea of doing all you can once embroiled in read more
  • Kenji: I should also clarify my own ... "rules of engagement". read more