Bad Juju! You no logged in or no introduced to the frogman. Log-in or register. Or suffer mucho hoo-doos.

The Bar

Have a drink and talk about:

“We” and what army?
the dissident frogman | Wed, September 19, 2007 | Permalink | 649 hits

Post

You're not logged-in, so your comment will be held for approval; check the "Help" tab for details.

Vous n'avez pas ouvert de session, votre commentaire doit être approuvé avant publication; voyez "Aide" pour les détails.


Comment form

Red-framed fields required. Email address will NOT be published or shared but may be used for a direct answer, on my part only.

Les champs bordés de rouge sont requis. L'adresse email ne sera PAS publiée ou partagée mais pourra être utilisée pour une réponse directe, de ma part seulement.


Guidelines | consignes

DISCLAIMER: in my experience, the following doesn't apply to 99% of my readership. Unfortunately, experience also shows it has to be written down for the remaining 1%.

The short version, when it comes to my comments policy, goes down to a line taken from the (mediocre) second opus of the Matrix:

"I built this place. Down here, I make the rules."

Let's elaborate a bit:

  1. Try to stay on topic. If you have a beef against the cow-fart(1) induced climate change and this post is about monkey spanking(2), then it's not the place to draw your sword(3).
    I have nothing against a freewheeling conversation, but if it's off-topic AND stupid or offensive, then it will have a badly limited lifespan.
  2. Consider the two following statements…
    • I'm totally open-minded when it comes to rational ideas.
    • It is quite obvious that Anti-Americanism, anti-Semitism, Islamism, Nationalism, Racism, Collectivism(4) and Multiculturalism (non-exhaustive list) exist in complete contradiction with Reason.
    … And guess the total amount of tolerance you can expect from me if you indulge in any of these.
  3. If you shall persist in these ways nevertheless, understand that I'm not spending countless hours of work on this site to "reach out", "debate" with you, "understand" your "root causes" or "learn" about your religion. Unlike race, ideology is something we choose, and for which we must bear all responsibilities. I loathe your sick mindset and what you defend and promote. I've heard all your pitiful excuses for your despicable totalitarian psyche and your compulsion to coerce or enslave your fellow men and women in the name of some "greater good".
    So understand that this is not a public forum: it is my outpost in the culture war you wage against me, my kin, my rights and my freedom — thus, you will only be tolerated here, and only if I decide so. I call the shots and I owe you nothing. As a matter of fact, I don't like having you around, so the only argument you're truly entitled to hear from me would come, if you insist, amplified through the barrel of my Sig-Sauer high powered rifle(5) — because when it comes to intolerant scumbags, I'm an intolerant bastard.
    So keep your distances, and nobody gets hurt.
  4. I also have a very limited patience for social-democrats of all race and creed, center-of-center jellyfish and buttermonkey(6) hybrids, Blame-America-First (and always) Libertarians (usually of the Rothbardian school), Hollywood idiots & Festival-de-Cannes cretins and those Parisians who fancy themselves as an elite when they are nothing but the developed world's rednecks(7). However, I tend to ignore them, so they may consider themselves lucky if they manage to draw some sarcasm in colorful language from me.
  5. Yeah, and don't get me started on journalists and the Wonderful World of Mainstream Media...
  6. American and British soldiers (including the Commonwealth) stand on a special pedestal in my personal pantheon. Disrespect them here, and you'll quickly wish you'd rather stand naked in Mecca during Hajj, wearing only a sign that reads "Muhammad was a pedophile".
  7. I may moderate, remove or edit anything and give neither excuses nor explanations. It has nothing to do with "censorship": I am not a State, you are not a coerced citizen of said State and so you are always free to express yourself on your own facility and by your own means. Commenting is not a right, it is a privilege I grant or take away, according to my right as the owner of this place.
  8. My site is not awfully biased: it's shamelessly opinioned. If you're on my side, you get my vote and are free to rant 'n' roll. If not, live with it or go rot in the gutter.
  9. Oh and, if you're a vegan, be advised that I hunt, kill, cook(8) and eat all sorts of animals, and thoroughly enjoy the whole lot of it. Have fun with your carrots, Doc.
  1. Ha ha. Beef. Cow. Geddit?
  2. It's been known to happen.
  3. Neither is the guestbook by the way.
  4. That includes of course all its variations: Socialism, National-Socialist, Communism, Fascism, etc.
  5. With a loud 'Bang'
  6. Nope, don't know what species is that either, but it does sound like a particularly vile creature, doesn't it?
  7. Tell me London, New-York, Sydney or Tokyo, but Paris is a dump.
  8. Frequently in some sort of wine sauce or with loads of tears-pulling spices. Grapes and pepper count as veggie stuff right?

AVERTISSEMENT : selon mon expérience, ce qui suit ne s'applique pas à 99% de mes lecteurs. Malheureusement, l'expérience prouve aussi qu'il faut que cela soit écrit pour le pourcentage restant.

La version courte, concernant ma politique pour les commentaires, se résume à une ligne tirée du second (médiocre) volet de Matrix:

"J'ai construit cet endroit. Ici, je fais les lois."

Élaborons un brin :

  1. Il existe une subtile différence entre "être familier" et "traiter familièrement". Cela signifie que les culs-sales qui s'imaginent débarquer ici et me tutoyer comme si nous avions gardé les piquets de grève ensemble verront leur contribution à la conversation éradiquée sans autre forme de procès. Quelle que soit la pertinence de ladite contribution. Même si vous n'êtes Vraiment Pas Content® avec ce que j'écris, cela ne vous dispense pas de surveiller vos manières : tant que je n'ai pas été présenté à votre chère Maman, nous nous vouvoierons. Vu ?
  2. Évitez le hors-sujet. Si vous avez une rancune à l'égard de l'impact des pets de vache sur le changement climatique et que cet article traite de la fessée de macaque(1), alors ce n'est pas l'endroit d'où lancer votre croisade (2).
    Je n'ai rien contre une conversation à bâtons rompus, mais si c'est hors-sujet ET stupide ou insultant, ça aura une durée de vie salement limitée.
  3. Considérez les deux affirmations suivantes...
    • J'ai une ouverture d'esprit totale en ce qui concerne toutes idées rationnelles.
    • Il est évident qu' Anti-américanisme, anti-Sémitisme, Islamisme, Nationalisme, Racisme, Collectivisme(3) et Multiculturalisme (liste non-exhaustive) existent en complète contradiction avec la Raison.
    ... Et tâchez de devinez la dose totale de tolérance que vous pouvez attendre de moi si vous cédez à l'une de ces sirènes.
  4. Si vous deviez cependant persister dans ces voies, comprenez que je ne dépense pas un nombre incalculable d'heures de travail sur ce site pour vous "tendre la main", "débattre" avec vous, "comprendre" vos "causes profondes" ou "apprendre à connaitre" votre religion. Contrairement à la race, l'idéologie est le résultat de nos choix, et nous devons en supporter l'entière responsabilité. J'abhorre votre mentalité tarée, et ce que vous défendez et promouvez. J'ai entendu toutes vos pitoyables excuses pour votre détestable psyché de totalitaire et votre compulsion à forcer et réduire vos semblables en esclavage au nom d'un quelconque "intérêt général".
    Comprenez donc que ceci n'est pas un forum publique : c'est mon avant-poste dans la guerre culturelle que vous lancez contre moi, mes semblables, mes droits et ma liberté — vous ne serez que toléré ici, et seulement si je le décide. Je tire les ficelles, et ne vous doit rien. En fait je n'aime pas vous voir dans le coin, et en conséquence les seuls arguments de ma part auxquels vous puissiez réellement prétendre, si vous insistez, se transmettent par le canon de ma carabine de fort calibre Sig-Sauer(4) — Parce dès qu'ils s'agit d'ordures intolérantes, je suis un salaud d'intolérant.
    Alors gardez vos distances, et personne ne sera blessé.
  5. J'ai aussi un patience très limitée pour les sociaux-démocrates de toute confession et couleur, les centristes-du-centre fruits de l'union d'une méduse et d'un cul de singe, les Libertarés de l'École Rothbard conditionnés au "C'est la faute à l'Amérique, toujours et partout", Les Idiots d'Hollywood et les Crétins-de-Cannes, de même que ces parisiens qui se prennent pour une élite alors qu'ils ne sont que les bouseux du monde développé (5). J'ai cependant tendance à les ignorer, et ils peuvent donc s'estimer chanceux s'ils arrivent à me soutirer ne serait-ce qu'un sarcasme en langage fleuri.
  6. Ouais, et ne me lancez pas sur les journalistes et le Monde Merveilleux des Medias...
  7. Les soldats Américains et Britanniques (parmi lesquels j'inclue le Commonwealth) prennent place sur un piédestal particulier dans mon panthéon personnel. Manquez leur de respect ici, et vous souhaiterez rapidement vous trouver plutôt à la Mecque en période Hajj, tout nu avec seulement une pancarte autour du coup sur laquelle on puisse lire "Mahomet était un pédophile".
  8. Je peux modérer, supprimer ou éditer quoi que ce soit, sans fournir d'excuses ni d'explications. Cela n'a rien à voir avec de la “censure”, pour une raison très simple : je ne suis pas un État, vous n'êtes pas un citoyen opprimé dudit État et demeurez donc libre de vous exprimer sur votre propre support et par vos propres moyens. Commenter n'est pas un droit, c'est un privilège que j'accorde ou refuse selon mon droit de propriétaire des lieux.
  9. Mon site n'est pas affreusement partial, il est impudemment orienté. Si vous êtes de mon côté, vous avez mon aval et êtes libre de disserter à l'envi. Sinon, faites avec ou allez crever dans le caniveau.
  10. Oh, et si vous êtes végétarien, sachez que je chasse, tue, cuisine(6) et bouffe toutes sortes d'animaux, et que j'apprécie le tout sans aucune retenue. Soyez heureux avec vos carottes Docteur.
  1. C'est déjà arrivé.
  2. C'est aussi valable pour le Livre d'Or.
  3. Ce qui inclue aussi ses variantes : Socialisme, National-Socialisme, Communisme, Fascisme, etc.
  4. Avec un gros 'Bang'
  5. Londres, New-York, Sydney ou Tokyo, d'accord. Mais Paris, c'est un bled de cul-terreux.
  6. Généralement avec une sauce au vin, ou alors des poignées d'épices à t'arracher la tripaille. Le raisin et les piments, ça compte comme trucs de végétarien, non ?

Help

  1. As an additional layer of defense against comment spamming and surf-by shooting, I enacted a set of restrictions on how you can post a comment as a simple guest on my site (i.e. either when you're not registered as a member, or registered but not logged in), starting with pre-publishing comment approval. As approving comments will take a certain — and variable — amount of time, I invite you to check-in if you're serious about joigning the conversation in real time.
  2. Non-authenticated users are also limited to the following HTML tags:
    • Bold (<strong></strong>)
    • Italic (<em></em>)
    • Underline (<u></u>)
    • Quote (<blockquote></blockquote>)
    Don't bother entering any other tags, as they will automagically get stripped on posting.
  3. Members have access to a greater range of tags and publishing tools, and they can also choose to be informed by email of follow-up comments, for any given thread.
  4. Members also have an easier and more straightforward posting process. Some of the system defenses are lowered for them, and the details fields (name, etc.) are pre-filled with the information they entered in their profile.
  5. Members have a greater chance to enter the Kingdom of Heaven, while it will be assumed that, in addition to an opinion, strangers have stinky feet and greasy fingers. They may therefore be regarded with great condescension by regular members and the dissident frogman alike, and derided accordingly. So wash your feet, your hands, and register.
  6. A reminder: you decide what you write, no matter how brilliant or stupid it might be, and the fact that I let it go published doesn't mean I condone, agree or disagree with it—no matter if I answer it or not. Hey, you're supposed to be a responsible adult, right?

If you need further help with the site, you may want to check the Field Manual. Ultimately, you can also drop me a line. I usually don't answer jellyfish and buttermonkey(1) hybrids however.

  1. Nope, don't know what species is that either, but it does sound like a particularly vile creature, doesn't it?
  1. En défense contre le spam et les tirs isolés, j'ai établi un ensemble de restrictions sur l'ajout de commentaires par les simples visiteurs sur le site (i.e. soit lorsque vous n'êtes pas enregistré comme membre, soit lorsque vous l'êtes, mais n'avez pas ouvert une session), dont notamment la modération avant publication. L’approbation des commentaires prenant un temps certain et variable, je vous invite donc à vous inscrire, si vous envisagez sérieusement de participer à la conversation en temps réel.
  2. Les utilisateurs non authentifiés sont également limités aux balises HTML suivantes :
    • Gras (<strong></strong>)
    • Italique (<em></em>)
    • Souligné (<u></u>)
    • Citation (<blockquote></blockquote>)
    Ne vous fatiguez pas à en utiliser d'autres, le texte passe par un filtre de suppression lors de la publication.
  3. Les membres ont accès à une plus large sélection d'outils et de balises, et ils peuvent choisir pour chaque 'conversation' à laquelle ils prennent part d'être informé par email des réponses.
  4. Les membres ont également un "processus de publication" plus simple et direct. Certaines défenses du système sont abaissées pour eux, et les champs des détails sont pré-remplis avec les informations qu'ils ont entré dans leur profil.
  5. Les membres ont une plus grande chance d'entrer au Royaume des Cieux, tandis que l'on considèrera que, en sus d'une opinion, les visiteurs venus d'ailleurs ont les doigts gras et les pieds sales. Ils pourront de ce fait être traité avec grande condescendance par les autres membres et le dissident frogman de même, et ridiculisés en conséquence. Alors lavez vos mains, vos pieds, et inscrivez-vous.
  6. Pour mémoire : vous décidez de ce que vous écrivez, aussi brillant ou stupide que cela soit, et le fait que j'en autorise la publication ne signifie pas que je l'approuve ou le désapprouve, et cela que j'y réponde ou non. Hé, vous êtes censé vous comporter en adulte responsable, s'pas ?

Si vous avez besoin de plus d'aide avec le site, jetez un œil au manuel d'instruction. Au pire, vous pouvez également m'envoyer un mot. J'ai cependant tendance à ne pas répondre aux fruits de l'union d'une méduse et d'un cul de singe.

Comments | Commentaires

Banjo | 10 months, 1 week ago
Avatar for Banjo
United States
09/19 2007
05:21 PM

The age-old American puppy-dog desire to be liked is so easily exploited by the French it would be funny if it weren’t tragic. Of course, they’ll stab us in the back again. We’ll be hurt—how could they? But we’ll find a way to explain it to ourselves with the help of the Democratic Party. It’s not them, it’s us. It’s always us.
HeckBoy | 10 months, 1 week ago
Avatar for HeckBoy
United States
Website
In: Auburn, AL USA
09/19 2007
09:34 PM

As a business owner, I’ve tried giving people the benefit of the doubt; life’s less stressful when you trust people.  At least it’s less stressful until you find out you’ve been screwed.  Now that I’m introducing an invention to the market, I’m being extremely cagey.  I trust no one and you know what - the folks with whom I’m dealing respect me much more than they would if I hadn’t learned from my experiences and changed my strategy.

Peace comes through strength, not appeasement.
Valerie, Texas | 10 months, 1 week ago
Avatar for Valerie, Texas
United States
09/19 2007
10:18 PM

Yet more brilliant and astute observations DF.  (I told you brililant was going to soon wear thin.)

Yes, we suffer from some form of dementia that makes us too quickly forget who are our enemies. There is a saying the Communist Chinese had for their close relationship with Communist Russia we should emulate when dealing with our "friends" in Old Europe:  When you dance with a bear, keep an axe handy.

We have new friends in New Europe, like brave and stalwart Poland.  We don’t need France any more. (As if we ever did, certainly not after WWI.)  I remember clearly when Jeff at Sofia Sideshow blogged on the joy and delight of the Bulgarians being admited to NATO.  It was a badge of honor.  A mark that they were once and truly, now and forever FREE people. 

I cannot see the French in this light.  They do not seem to want to live as free people.  And for this long, tough fight ahead for our survival we need people who want to be free. Yearn to be free.  Who will die to stay free.  Not placid serfs willing to plog after who tosses them their crust of bread. 

Or who promises not to behead them if they behave. 

 

 

 

 
Grimmy | 10 months, 1 week ago
Avatar for Grimmy
United States
In: Where I'm at.
09/20 2007
03:52 AM

France has a long and well established history of taking whatever intel and/or information it has gotten from NATO or any other cooperative venture and immediately turning that intel and/or information over to whatever enemy needs to be bribed that day.

 

 
TooTall | 10 months, 1 week ago
Avatar for TooTall
United States
In: Utah
09/20 2007
11:54 AM

Sanctions?  We don’t need no stinkin’ sanctions!  Why would more sanctions work now since they’ve failed in the past?  Even if they stood the fabled snowball’s chance in hell they won’t pass since Germany has already said that they won’t support any more sanctions since it might  impact their economy.
SisterToldjah | 10 months, 1 week ago
Avatar for SisterToldjah
United States
Website
09/20 2007
12:31 PM

cobaltberet wrote:


Now that I’m introducing an invention to the market, I’m being extremely cagey. I trust no one and you know what - the folks with whom I’m dealing respect me much more than they would if I hadn’t learned from my experiences and changed my strategy.

Peace comes through strength, not appeasement. 


Indeed.  Democrats, of course, believe in appeasement over strength and think if we just learn to ‘get along with’ and ‘understand’ Islamofascists then they’ll leave us alone.  The Bush administration on the other hand, while they don’t appease Islamofascists (thank goodness), they are so interested in being ‘liked’ that Bush will treat "leaders" like Vladimir Putin as a "friend" all the while Putin is stabbing us in the back.  I remember Rummy created quite a stir with his "old Europe" comments, and afterwards I would almost bet that the phone calls between DC and those "old European" countries were fast and furious in an attempt to "clarify" the remarks and soothe ruffled feathers.


I do realize that a lot of it is just putting on a "public face" and that behind the scenes the attitude towards repressive countries like Russia is likely deservedly hostile, but some of it - I think  - has to do with Bush’s inherent desire to believe in the best of people.  That’s a nice attitude to have personally towards relatives and friends, but not one that is particularly well-suited for governing our country, and I say this as someone who has supported the President from day one, even though I have had my fair share of disagreements with  him on several issues.


I do hope that while putting on the public face of an alliance with Sarko, that behind the scenes the President is being very cautious and guarded against trusting him too much.  Hopefully on that front, he has learned his lesson.


Great post, DF - my eyes continue to be opened on Sarko’s deception, thanks to you.
TMLutas | 10 months, 1 week ago
Avatar for TMLutas
United States
Website
09/20 2007
01:00 PM

I think that you underestimate the difficulty of turning around an entire political culture. Within my lifetime, the Republican party imposed wage and price controls (Nixon) and assorted other left-wing nonsense in their economic policy. All the while they were beaten about the head and shoulders by all right thinking americans as barbaric unfeeling right wing savages.

Even if all the things you say are true, Sarkozy is supplying a valuable service to the political culture of France. Never again will the full court press about how nasty, american, etc. a french reformer is carry the weight that it did with Sarkozy. Sarkozy took every dirty low blow possible, came out on top, and now only has to prove he doesn’t have fangs to change the dynamic of electing future leaders of France. Believers in liberty had been successfully demonized in France to an extent that most americans would find shocking. One cures this only through the election of the most freedom loving viable candidate available which creates the space for even more freedom loving candidates the next round. Newt could never have risen to power without Reagan. President Bush is providing a similar service (though it will become much more obvious after he leaves office) for the next generation of the center-right.

Hopefully, along the way, the French political culture will pick up and dust off their honor, international solidarity, and sense of spine. But that’s something that ultimately comes from the collective personal decisions of the French electorate that they want to make something of France more than the ramshackle remnant of very old glory.
Iwo Gina | 10 months, 1 week ago
Avatar for Iwo Gina
United States
In: Columbia, Maryland
09/20 2007
01:08 PM

Only someone that truly loves you will tell you what you need  to hear… not what you want  to hear. Thanks for telling us what we need to hear, DF.
mbrewer2045 | 10 months, 1 week ago
Avatar for mbrewer2045
United States
In: Wisconsin USA
09/20 2007
01:23 PM

Being educated in public schools, I have a history question that I was hoping somebody could answer for me please.

Name for me, at any point in history, where one group of people (culture, civilization, tribe, etc) has "appeased" the invading group of people into not invading and preserving the original culture.  Can anybody provide a historical example of how "appeasement" has worked?  Again, I admit my history education lacks substantially behind those educated in REAL schools, but I am hardpressed into coming up with any examples on this.  You might conclude that after a couple of thousand years of written record keeping, we might have at least one example of this policy actually working.

It isn’t in human nature to "simply get along" with groups that you despise (for whatever, and usually incorrect, reason(s)), and it probably won’t be soon.  I wish Democrats would understand that so we could move on from the silly debates currently wasting resources in our Congress (hey, it’s my dream....I can still dream, can’t I?).  Anyway, I’ll keep the boomstick handy and a watchful eye on our "friends"....because, as we all know, we can always trust our friends.....(no offense intended to all of those individuals, organizations or governments that ACTUALLY are our friends).
the dissident frogman | 10 months ago
Avatar for the dissident frogman
Website
09/20 2007
03:49 PM
Comment 2677

TMLutas,

I appreciate your positive approach, but with all due respect find it rather misplaced, as I don’t believe the US can be compared to France.

Do correct me if I’m wrong, but when Republicans (or any other party for that matter) raise taxes, control prices and wages, and generally speaking inflate the size and reach of the central government, they are quite simply an anomaly — as in so doing, they go against the founding principles of the nation - and the people can, and do indeed, fix many, if not all, these anomalies. 

After all, taxes and representation are the real issues that laid the foundations of the USA, and the sparks that ignited the American Revolution.

France however, is exactly America’s dark twin in that respect. The all powerful central state goes back to Louis the XIVth (at least) and the only thing the French Revolution “changed” was to move the centre of power from Versailles to Paris. The “revolutionaries” then proceeded to fully institutionalize and organize the principle of state control and intervention, that remains the pillar of the French republic to this very day - arresting thousands, and cutting the heads who dared get in the way or were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time — in effect inventing the doctrine of Terrorism (it’s no coincidence the French Revolution was the inspiration and reference to most of the 20th century Communist ones, starting with the Soviet.)

To this day, this principle has never been challenged by any French politician, and even less so by the French people (those who choose to stay, that is). Within my voter’s lifetime (roughly 20 years), I’ve seen both sides rule the country and talk about “decentralization”, a much vaunted concept by which they mean to share the power with the local institutions. This was cheap talk (Sarkozy isn’t a pioneer, even in that respect) and remains dead letter, and Sarkozy himself doesn’t bother mentioning it anymore (He does take pleasure in being compared to Napoleon Bonaparte however).

In addition to that, bear in mind that, for instance, the French didn’t reject the European Constitution because they saw it as yet more intrusion by the State in their life, but on the contrary denounced it as an Anglo-Saxon ultraliberal scheme (in the classic, European meaning of the term: free market, competition, individual liberties, etc.) whose only purpose was to attack their beloved social model of Marxist theft and redistribution. In short, in their view it’s not that the EU Constitution offered them too much Socialism, but rather not enough.

That’s the French political culture there and then, and unlike you, I actually hope it won’t pick up and dust off again, as every time it did, it brought nothing but more pain and restriction on the people’s liberty, self-responsibility and ultimately prosperity. In fact, I fear this is precisely what Sarkozy is trying to achieve, and I believe his call for reforms’ only goal is not to enable a drastic change of society, but to restore the establishment’s “welfare”, threatened as this neo-aristocratic class feels by the steady decline in State revenue, resulting from the last 30 years’ ghastly economic performance (itself a result of their collectivist and interventionist policies.)

I guess the bottom line is that even if I was wrong and Sarkozy was not the political establishment drone I feel he is, then he would be and remain an anomaly in French political culture — and I believe you underestimate the capacity of said culture not to reform itself. France’s overblown central State is not the result of some misguided and recent political experiment that shall in time be corrected by the voters: It is France’s very nature.

Mbrewer2045,

I can’t think of any - quite the opposite actually (and being French, I know something of the “virtues” of appeasement.)

But then, I’ve been educated in public schools too (not that we have a choice here, since the French state forces its monopoly on Education, as in so many other fields)
Ben USN (Ret) | 10 months ago
Avatar for Ben USN (Ret)
United States
Website
In: Washington State, USA
09/22 2007
03:34 AM

I can see why you got such a great sense of humor, DF. You really need it!

Thanks for the education, sir!

 
Comment page 1 / 1 pages |

Trackbacks

Post title: “We” and what army?

Date: 19th September, 2007