Quote of the day—Aesop

Because most of the country, like most people who read and post here, have two settings:
1) Vote
2) Fuck it, kill every last one of them.

We move to #2 slowly, but it’s nigh irrevocable once it happens, and unstoppable until we run out of targets. Which will happen long before we run out of ammunition.

This will not be the Alamo x 1000.
It will be Little Big Horn.
And this time, we get to be the Indians.

More than a few hereabouts are already wearing bibs every day to contain the drool at joy of such a prospect.

Most of the rest, while rather horrified, are quietly resolved on the inevitability of the coming bloodbath, and have their hipboots and bandoliers ready.

March 28, 2019
In Case You’re New To The Discussion
[Nearly everyone about to initiate a hot civil war thinks it will be quick and extremely one-sided. Reality appears to have always corrected such delusions once things progress from the fantasy to the blood letting stage.

We are currently involved in a civil war. It may be 5th-Generation Warfare, but it is a war. This type of war is not clean. Turning it into 4th Generation Warfare model does not appear appear to be good option either. It is my opinion that hope such a war being quick and clean is going to require a new warfare model. I don’t believe the current planners are up to the task.

Let’s concentrate on changing the culture.—Joe]


11 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Aesop

  1. There is no clean war.

    The important thing to note is that the cultural effects of the civil war and its aftermath are still felt today in the south and by blacks across the country. As bloody as the civil war was it did not resolve the culture issues. We can’t even agree on the underlying motivations that were involved.

    Why would we expect Civil War II to result in a better outcome?.

    So yes we need to work to change the culture, but I’m not optimistic that will work either.

    • We may well be the Indians in the next war. The key takeaway is the fighting did not stop when the smoke cleared over the Little Bighorn.
      Kick the lid off of hell and there’s no telling how long or how bad it will be. World War 2, the “Good War” was long, hard, bloody and hellish, Even for the “winners”.

  2. It’s not just “civil war” although they are often the bloodiest, nastiest, and have the worst long term effects. Every war in history had someone who thought there would be a quick, relatively painless victory, or that the enemy didn’t have the stomach for a prolonged fight and would surrender without bloodshed. Famously, in the American civil war, both sides expected a short war and and an easy victory. Bull Run/Manassas Junction and Later Shilo/Pittsburg Landing managed to dispel that illusion. In 1914, Germany joined Austria against Serbia in order to prevent Russia from attacking Austria, because Russia wouldn’t take on both Austria and Germany. France and later England both felt the war would be over by Christmas 1914. Sometimes the fight is worth the cost, sometimes the fight is forced on us by others, but never assume the victory will easy or cheap.

  3. My heart aches for the Tactical Timmy’s who think that a civil war will be fought with rifles when the best analysis is that it will be fought with gasoline.

    Sleep well.

  4. Some keep thinking it will be a civil war. say, urban against rural. but that ignores the fact that its globalist were up against. the next American war will have several sides. none will be pretty. America is a very rich land. with lots to plunder. Once internal turmoil drops our main defences. we will be wide open. and nothing to stop the cartels, the Soro’s, the UN, Russia, China, and God know who else. These are the good old days, enjoy a pizza and beer while you can.

    • Good point. Matthew Bracken described this in the second novel of his “Enemies” trilogy, in which armies from various third world countries occupy parts of the USA at the invitation of its government (of one of the four pieces of the USA, that is).

  5. David Axe says;
    “In other words, focus on economic development, humanitarian assistance and communication…”

    In other words; respond to the socialistic, violence-generating, coercion-based, cleptocrat governments by implementing international, coercive, Redistributive Change.

    It always has to be coercive. Go into Somalia or Afghanistan right now, set up a factory, or a true charity outlet, and see what happens. If it’s small enough to avoid international radar you may survive for a time, but once you get big enough to change the course of the region’s history for the better (toward the perfect law of liberty), you’ll be targeted for destruction, either by hook or by crook. Such is the entire history of that part of the world, and the U.S. is playing its part in it too, one way or another.

    In other words; when socialism fails, freedom is to blame, and the solution is more socialism. It’s the Obama Doctrine, the Vatican Doctrine, the Republican Doctrine, the Democratic Doctrine, and the doctrine of every current Western nation all at the same time. Liberty never seems to be on anyone’s table for discussion as a serious option, for how could it be when coercion rules the world? The only options being offered publicly, argued and fought over publicly, are mere variations on global fascism. We can argue global fascism verses local fascism for now, but eventually it’ll all be a fake contest between various flavors of global fascism.

    Welcome to Babylon. Does anyone have anything to offer besides papal pig-Latin, Jesuit jibber-jabber, and Masonic machinations? Not if they want to keep their jobs, or their heads.

    90+% of you excoriating the left and cheering for the right, so far as I can tell, are doing so because you have a “better” form of coercive, Romish system in mind. That would certainly include every single Trump cheerleader.

    Given that, how could I possibly care who “wins”? Let’s see; do I want destruction by quick strangulation or by slow poison? Some want me to fight passionately for one “side” in that fake dichotomy. Some are saying, “Well at least with the slow poison doctrine you may have a chance to find an antidote, so if you don’t fight for the side of destruction by slow poison then you’re a traitor, as bad is the quick strangulation side!!” Meh. I’ll pass. I really, really do not care.

    It is a mistake too, and a fatal one, to even consider this as being an America issue. It is a full-on global war, and the U.S. government is on the wrong side.

    Where does that leave us then? I reckon one has two choices; either be a part of Babylon, or come out and be separate from it. Either way you die, of course, but one way you’re not a part of the problem.

    Being that the solution is not a worldly one, says the Bible, you cannot really be a part of the solution either, other than to accept that solution as your advocate and ally. That’s how a strapping young sheepherder with no military training, no armor and no sword took down the enemy’s flagship weapon.

    David didn’t credit himself for beating Goliath, which is the whole point; our own internal strength, as we think of it, our cleverness, willfulness, planning, skill and works are for naught but self destruction unless we’re allied with that one solution, which is not worldly and from which all our real strength comes anyway. This message is shouting at us from all throughout history, over and over and over.

  6. I was just listing to Tim Pool (https://www.timcast.com/). Today’s report is about an NYT article that asks who are the Democrats? It points out that the very vocal far left only makes up about 8% of the total. The others are moderates and more conservative. Many of them do not have online presence nor do they pay much attention to the news.

    So is that the group that we are discussing? If so we too could be being misled.

    And if this is the case then 2020 may be a big disappointment to the vocal left.

  7. Yes civil war will be extremely bloody and destructive. Plus we may not win and even if we do, we will have killed the republic. Changing the culture is probably a lost cause. The Left has taken over too many cultural institutions. So I concentrate on the national divorce. We have a chance to preserve and enhance the cultural in the sound parts of the country but not if we are joined to the urban shitholes.

    • I see the concept of a national divorce a lot, but I believe that’s less likely than changing the culture.
      We probably won’t change the culture because politicians (both sides) won’t stop importing foreigners at record levels. A culture is made of its people, change the people, change the culture. It’s well known that foreign integration into a host nation’s culture takes time, but the more of their original culture is around, the easier it is to fall back on, i.e.- they don’t integrate but coexist. And cultures clash.

      For the divorce, that’ll be impossible. Socialists seek to control and humiliate their opponents. You really think they’ll let us go?

      tl;dr- buy lots of ammo, practice a lot, and surround yourself with those you trust most. You’re gonna need it.

  8. “It’s well known that foreign integration into a host nation’s culture takes time,…”
    All the time in the world, actually.
    “Assimilation” is a myth. It might occur if there were means that kept immigrants from living in the same local area with each other. THAT is what keeps their culture thriving, by living and working in close proximity. When you see immigrants taht have been here for a decade or more and they still don’t speak English, that is a bad sign. When you see lots of business signs in other than English, that’s a bad sign. When the government prints forms in other than English, that’s a bad sign. When lots of vehicles have flag stickers of foreign nations, or are flying a foreign flag, that’s a bad sign. When you see vehicles with signs indicating a regional affiliation for a noted trouble zone of a foreign nation, that is a BAD sign.

Comments are closed.