10 Lessons the US should learn from Iraq defeat

Looks like we're fairly well in agreement.

 

Perhaps, but I don't view immigration as an issue in terms of race.

My concerns are purely a matter of culture. I think certain cultures are less compatible with our mainstream culture than others.

Islam, in particular, seems to have a lot of conflicts with things like the separation of church and state, for example.

We already have a hard enough time keeping evangelicals from uniting government and religion, but when Islamists enter the mix, that just makes things even harder.

The good news is that most Muslims that come to the West are liberal compared to their peers in their home countries. This isn't as true in Europe as it is for America and Canada, but the general trend is there.

I don't see current demographic trends as being a genocide against whites. It's just an inevitable fact of existence that poorer and less educated people breed more. As a culture prospers, family size usually decreases.

So, as countries like India and Pakistan become wealthier and better educated, the number of children per family will decrease over time.

There are exceptions to this, of course, like the Mormons, but most of the time, that's how things work.

 

The rushs to war in Irai in 2003 can be seen as a manipulation of the American public.
The American pepole were basically brainwashed to send their boys to die, not for Iraqi freedom, not because of any WMD, but for cheap oil contracts, taking down an enemy of Israel, allowing defense corporations to win big contracts and the opportunity of politicians to wrap themselves in the American flag.
After watching this process in amazment, I gaind a lot more sympathy for the German people of 1939 who allowed themselve to be drawn into war.
Folks, people can be brainwashed to do the most amazing things.
There was one more hidden agenda of the policy wonks in government.
Deeply divided empires (in the U.S. empire there are deep ethnic and racial divisions) often instigate small foreign wars in order to distract their disparate population blocks from going into civil war.
Our high school history teacher told us one reason we went to war with Mexico in 1848 was to forestall our approaching civil war.
Picking little wars for these reasons is a common phenomina in empires teetering on the brink of civil war.
Mass imigration and the divisions it is causing is a large part of the reason for the invasion of Granada, Panama, the first Iraq war, Somalia, Bosnia, Haiti, Iraq II, Libya and possibly up coming, Syria and Iran.

 

I also think that people who leave their own home countries and cultuers are less idiologically driven. But I also think that lack of cultural/idiological/apolitical concern means they are not being attracted to our culture because of freedom. I think 90% of immigrants are motivated by economics.
My little populist newspaper, Middle American News, has reported that Mexicans who move to the U.S. have larger families than those who stay home.
I've got to log off now. Too much to do. Thanks for the chat.

 

Economic refugees are certainly more common than political ones, so I agree.

 

Talking of brainwashing, I think you might find the Conspiracy Theories sub-forum more to your taste... Just saying...

 

I think it's entirely appropriate for people to migrate for economic reasons-why wouldn't you, given the opportunity to better yourself and make life more comfortable in the process? Furthermore I don't believe that one's ethnicity should be deciding factor when determining someone's elegibility for immigration. Why should it be?

 

Wolves exhibit maybe not ethnocentrism but definately "clanism" as in the Hatfields vs. the McCoys.
I think "racism" is really just clanism, origianlly intended to make you aware of a difference between your group and the group a couple of valleys over who have a slightly different accent and slightly different gene pool mix.
However, if a person is not of your race, he is certainly not of your clan, so you instinct kicks in.
I agree higher order mamals that live in groups all have this basic "ethnocentric" instinct.
Wolves do keep others out of their pack territory. Wolf packs ranging in size from f our or five to about 15 max.
Apparently the ethnocentric instinct works until inbreeding gets to be a problem. I've heard some documentaries where then one wolf in the pack will "sponsor" a lone wolf to join.

The sponsor I suppose would be the canine equivalent of a human liberal.
However in a country of a few million like Ireland bringing in Somali immigrants makes no sense in terms of the original liberal instinct of avoiding excessive inbreeding. Once a country like Ireland with dozens of family names, had over a million population with roads and carts for movement inbreeding was no longer a problem.
I think the liberal "lets welcome everybody who turns up" instinct is not applicable in modern terms.
The people who want mass immigration, for what ever reasons, misuse this liberal instinct and take advantage of it.
The same thing occurs in that a puppies instinct to look up to it's owner as "the pack leader" is also not the original purpose of the "obey the pack leader " instinct. Going further if it's a border collie, using the Collies instinct to stalk and turn it to sheep herding for the benefit of the shepard is also a case of turning and instinct of another being to something the instinct didn't originate to do.
The border Collie does get feed lamb chops occasionally I presume, but my point is human instincts can be turned away from their original natural purpose and in some instances against the interest of the human involved.
Advertisers make use of human herd instinct to create a false impression of herd preference for brand X because everyone in TV land is using brand X.
In our time mass media has turned our liberals instincts into a weapon of mass destruction for our race.
Any way that’s been the view I’ve come to the last several years.
Manipulation of the masses also allows leaders to take them into wars.

 

Ones ethnicity is important if there is large scale immigration. Otherwise the host population will eventually disappear as a distinct people. That's why noone is pushing say native Americans to open up their reservations to non Indian immigration. If they did open them up they would be blended out of existence. Here in Australia the aboriginals have their own exclusive communities and territory. In the cities where they dont they are mostly half breeds. People might call them aboriginal but in fact they are no more aboriginal than they are white and full blood aboriginals don't really accept them as such except as political allies. If the aboriginal communities were opened up to mass non aboriginal immigration then aboriginals would be eventually blended out of existence. The same concept applies to any group which loses exclusive living space.

 

Uh huh.

Pack members can come from other clans. Wolves also leave their pack and join other packs. So your example is still not supporting your argument. Wolves can and do switch "clans"...in fact it seems to be a regular part of their social behavior.

Evolution is driven by diversity. Populations that are not diverse do not evolve...they stagnate.

The instinct to accept him into your pack...oh wait a minute, thats wolves again.

Humans still form clans as well. But nowadays we call them "nations".

 

Nations create the borders we have but the dynamic that runs the world is much more complex. I think we learned that in Iraq and with analyzation of our own country I think you will see the same kind of make up with a much more complex power and loyalty system than it would be simple to explain. Clans are real, ethnic lines are real, societal classes are real, there are a hell of a lot of things to pull us apart as a nation and make governing ourselves very difficult but we have done it for hundreds of years in one of the greatest experiments in human history, can man rule himself? I think we are getting away from this concept and the ideals which make it possible in our country. These snowball effect is building and has allowed the government to gain more power than it has ever had before, not because the government is evil or some wild conspiracy but becuase the american individual stopped carring enough to prevent it. We need to get back to the values of work ethic, individualism, and integrity which made this country great. Laws can not rule man, man can only rule himself with integrity and pride in his individualism and a drive to work fore a better future for himself and his family

http://thoughtsofreasonorinsanity.wordpress.com/