Jim's Blog

Or perhaps he listens in to State Department phone calls.

Putin on Islamic State as a state department proxy:

In these circumstances, it is hypocritical and irresponsible to make loud declarations about the threat of international terrorism while turning a blind eye to the channels of financing and supporting terrorists, including the process of trafficking and illicit trade in oil and arms. It would be equally irresponsible to try to manipulate extremist groups and place them at one’s service in order to achieve one’s own political goals in the hope of later dealing with them or, in other words, liquidating them.

To those who do so, I would like to say — dear sirs, no doubt you are dealing with rough and cruel people, but they’re in no way primitive or silly. They are just as clever as you are, and you never know who is manipulating whom. And the recent data on arms transferred to this most moderate opposition is the best proof of it.

We believe that any attempts to play games with terrorists, let alone to arm them, are not just short-sighted, but fire hazardous (ph). This may result in the global terrorist threat increasing dramatically and engulfing new regions, especially given that Islamic State camps train militants from many countries, including the European countries.

Unfortunately, dear colleagues, I have to put it frankly: Russia is not an exception. We cannot allow these criminals who already tasted blood to return back home and continue their evil doings. No one wants this to happen, does he?

Well actually I am pretty sure that the State Department does want it to happen. And that each terrorist incident in Europe and Australia will be preceded and followed by State Department pressure to address the “root causes” – the root causes being insufficient diversity and affirmative action. Observe that the recent Australian government initiative to mend fences with the Muslim Community was immediately followed by a terrorist incident, which proves the urgent importance of mending fences with the Muslim community.

Observe the smooth and continuous transition under way from affirmative action being necessary because the official victims are so weak, to being unavoidable because the official victims are so powerful and dangerous.

Arab Spring has predictably been an utter disaster.

By undermining the legitimacy of existing authority, it has turned the middle east into a sea of blood and fire, the worst cases being Syria and Libya.

Middle Easterners are mostly of inferior races, and at the best of times, it is hard for them to maintain the basic functions of a modern society, hard to keep the electricity running, the water running, the sewage off the streets, and all that.  To operate this quite ordinary stuff in a society dominated by an inferior race requires a fair bit of arrogant confident elitism and a cheerful willingness to smack grossly inferior people around to keep them from mischief.  Arab Spring has been democratic and anti elitist.  Thus most of the anti Bashar Assad groups in Syria just cannot keep that stuff functioning, and keep begging the horrid evil tyrant Bashar Assad to keep that stuff operating for them.

Near as I can figure, the major reasons that Bashar Assad is a horrible tyrant is that he stops stupid people from doing stupid things and he will not let them rape and murder those of non Muslim minorities.

Oddly, Obama and the Cathedral press have unshaken confidence that Obama is on the correct side of history.  From time to time they confidently predict that Putin will fail unless he overthrows Bashar Assad for the Cathedral, after many years of disastrous failure by the Cathedral in its efforts to overthrow Bashar Assad.

Obama and the New York Times and the rest live in an echo chamber, utterly impervious to outside reality.  Their policy cannot be a disaster, because they are on the right side of history.

The natural outcome of democracy is that each tribe votes for  its tribal interest.  The result is unacceptable to all the minority tribes.  War ensues, unless the majority group has a natural advantage in military struggle as well as voting, unless the majority group is the clearly superior group.  If you have democracy without war, it is because you have an ethnically homogeneous society, or someone is rigging the system to produce acceptable results.

Bashar Assad’s strength is that his religion is the only religion in Syria, other than Christianity, that is tolerant enough that it can be trusted to refrain from massacring minorities and his political organization is the only one that has the basic competence to keep the basic services of a modern society functioning and the will to keep the hands of subhumans off those basic services.

The Cathedral congratulates itself that it is rule by smart superior people, but rule by smart superior people was an unprincipled exception, which exception has now been rolled back.

The effects of rule by stupid people are most immediately apparent at your DMV department, at your airport security screening, and in Syria.

If you are not getting Syrian style brownouts, the people who are keeping our power system functioning, the people who making sure you do not get brownouts, are all rather old and due to retire soon.  Soon your power supply will be provided by the same people who operate airport security, because right now, white male privilege keeps the power on, and that is an unprincipled exception.

A British warship was sailing in Iraqi waters, waters that Iran had in 1975 agreed were Iraqi, which treaty it had never disavowed.  Iraq was at the time effectively ruled by the British and Americans.

Two small boats with fifteen British sailors left the warship to inspect a small ship for contraband.  Under the nose of the British warship, in Iraqi waters, three Iranian coastguard vessels kidnapped those British sailors.  Despite immensely superior firepower, those aboard to the British warship were too terrified to do anything about it.

There were several different official versions of why the warship failed to act, with the final and official version being that they failed to notice.  Oh come on.

The sailors, and Britain, and numerous organs of the British government, proceeded to issue apologies to their captors.  After much groveling, the captives were released.  The denouement of this incident reveals its cause.

Britain lately has been suffering completely ridiculous one sided defeats by small ill equipped poorly trained Arab forces.

I wondered how this could be so, so I purchased Losing Small Wars: British Military Failure
tl;dr

During World War II Churchill complained:

“Pray explain to me how it is that in the Middle East 750,000 men always turn up for their pay and rations but when it comes to fighting only 100,000 turn up.”

When fighting Arabs in Iraq and Afghanistan, only a couple of hundred turned up.

Compare and contrast the British army before the Crimean war, where if you had a ten thousand troops, ten thousand troops would usually fight, their officers leading from the front rather than hanging around surrounded by numerous flunkies in a large well appointed well defended base, logistics being largely provided by camp followers employed by regimental commanders, mostly female camp followers who worked vertically by day and horizontally by night, and consequently had immeasurably lower status than actual fighting men.

Partly this is Parkinsons law, but partly it is rule by priests over warriors. The typical British general regards hurting people and breaking their toys as rather disgraceful and embarrassing, and such activity is unlikely to lead to medals and promotions.  They focus on activities that do not directly aim at hurting people, like raising the self esteem of Afghan women and British servicewomen.

A huge flood of blacks from subsaharan Africa is pouring into Europe, since stopping them has very recently been made illegal, and when they arrive, they are guaranteed free food and housing, and the welfare state and feminist laws has left white pussy readily available, undefended, and defenseless.   What man in his right mind will protect a slut (assuming she wants to be protected, which is unlikely)?

A necessary consequence is that whites are going to be eliminated from Europe – probably not any time very soon, but now it begins:

Boris Palmer, the Green Party mayor of Tübingen, told Welt newspaper the town was struggling to find accommodation for migrants.

“The Police Law has clear rules. If there is a threat of homelessness in a city, vacant houses can be seized for accommodation,” Mr Palmer said.

And if they are not vacant now, they will be soon after a bunch of blacks move in next door.

These guys were sleeping in mud and thatch huts before they came, if they were not sleeping in the long grass. Now they get a house some white man built. And when they turn that house into a burned out ruin, after the fashion of Detroit, built by whites, burned by blacks, they will complain of racism and systematic discrimination because whites still have nicer stuff than they do, so they need to take more white stuff and wreck it also.

Blacks are like locusts. They take the stuff that white people built, for example the American inner city, destroy it, and then move on to take something else. They cannot be stopped because the state apparatus forbids white collective self defense, while encouraging black collective rioting, encouraging collective attacks on random isolated whites motivated by black hatred of whites and black sense of collective identity. This raises the cost of housing for white people to unaffordable levels, preventing family formation.

Whites move out from their houses because of state sponsored collective black violence, as is happening now in Baltimore and Ferguson, and blacks move in to houses white people built.

According to progressive mythology

insurgents must be like a mist—everywhere and nowhere—never trying to hold ground or wasting lives in battles with regular armies. Chairman Mao insisted that guerrillas should be fish who swam in the sea of the local population. Such views are the logical corollaries of “asymmetric warfare” in which a smaller, apparently weaker group—like ISIS—confronts a powerful adversary such as the US and Iraqi militaries. This is confirmed by US Army studies of more than forty historical insurgencies, which suggest again and again that holding ground, fighting pitched battles, and alienating the cultural and religious sensibilities of the local population are fatal.

This, of course, is a load of horseshit. One needs a base area in which one can conscript and gather funds, where leaders can safely and openly administer and coordinate. Hard to run the war from a secret cave. Often that base area has been the Kremlin – and even more often, it has been the London School of Economics.

In asymmetric wars, one’s base is often beholden to others, and one is therefore handicapped by unwanted ideology and rules. So Islamic State decided it just plain needed to grab its own base area. Islamic law is that you cannot claim the Caliphate unless you have your own base area – because you cannot be Caliph if you are beholden to others. So, needed a base, took a base. So Islamic State chooses to fight symmetrically. In an asymmetric war, the weaker side is a muppet for somebody powerful, usually the London School of Economics, which is itself a muppet of Harvard. Islamic State is nobody’s muppet.

This allows it to be authentically Islamic – to implement its own program and its own ideology.

And, being able to implement its own program and own ideology, gives gays the high jump, reintroduces slavery and the marriage of minors.

Progressives are mystified and uncomprehending.

horrors unimaginable even to the Taliban—among them the reintroduction of forcible rape of minors and slavery—have been legitimized.

Slavery never really went away. Saudi Arabia reluctantly abolished it 1964. The suppression of slavery is not the natural result of the Zeitgeist, but the military programs of British imperialism. Since the imperial tide retreats, slavery returns. As for the “rape” of minors, minor girls are going to have sex, which is to say, be “raped” unless they are married off young or kept under tight control, pretty much locked up except when appropriately supervised, and progressives have never been worried about the statutory rape of minors, nor the actual rape of minors, nor the actual enslavement of minors for sexual purposes, provided that the right people get raped and the right people are doing the raping. The ever rising age of consent was always a pretense and a pretext. Provided that fathers lose control of their daughters and husbands do not gain control of those daughters, progressives are untroubled by pimps gaining control of those daughters.

You may have heard that there are over a million poor stateless victimized Rohingya that our do gooders want to move into first world countries to vote for more leftism.

And indeed it is true that they are poor stateless and victimized. But a big part of the reason that they are poor, stateless, and victimized, is that they believe that Muslims should live under Muslim rule, and to this end they tried to carve a Muslim state out of Burma. To my surprise, they do not want to go to a first world country, such as America. They want to go to a Muslim ruled state, such as Malaysia. A few days ago, America legally accepted its first batch of Rohingya from a refugee camp in Thailand. Thai military attempted to move them to the US, Rohingya refugees refused and rioted, seeking the opportunity to set sail to a Muslim country.

These guys take their religion seriously. And their religion says that Islam should rule, and they should be ruled by Islam. They are reasonably happy to be ruled by moderate Islam, you cannot get much more moderate than their favorite destination, Malaysia, but Islam it has to be.

If brought to America or Australia, they will be in America very much against their will, and therefore will likely attempt to create a Muslim ruled state inside America as they attempted to create a Muslim ruled state inside Burma.

The Bangladeshi refugees who are intermingled with the Rohingya refugees, who speak the same language as the Rohingya refugees, who look like the Rohingya refugees, are economic refugees, seeking a better life. They want to go to first world states such as America and Australia. Maybe many of the Rohingya refugees are economic refugees also. But they are primarily religious refugees, seeking, not freedom to practice their religion, but freedom to persecute anyone who does not practice their religion. They don’t want to go to the first world. They want to go to Dar al Islam.

If I had my way, we would ship them all to Islamic State.