One of my lieutenants asked me, "do you know the process for giving the all clear?"
No.
"you find the most insignificant, disposable soldier around, and you get your senior nco as well, 'private hand your weapon to sgt so and so.' you have your weapons trained on him when you do this. then, 'private, take off your mask.'"
20 years ago a guy at a tech conference said the IOT would let your dental insurance company raise your rates if you didn't brush your teeth, because your wifi toothbrush would tell on you, and he meant it like it was a good thing.
The tasks of identifying, locating, and neutralizing these people would be gargantuan. It would take an army of men years to complete.
The end result of their actions is, at minimum, local societal breakdown, if not full collapse into WROL territory. Interestingly, full collapse into WROL would cull these people naturally within 6 weeks.
If the gap between the two is too large it breeds contempt.
I have come across a tiny tiny number of very very smart women in my field, and we got along great. It's almost too good, though, because everyone knows where that leads if you let it. You have to put up strong barriers or break contact completely.
I would only call that up for review based on the cost. I don't know how much 5 pounds of c4 costs, but if it's cheap, then by all means. I'm sure an ounce would do the job if it is not cheap.
Any and all retarded expenses are not justified simply because someone can make a case that something can or might happen. You can play that game all day and never run out of retarded unrealistic contingencies to prepare for.
A gun is cheap and is a one time purchase. It's not comparable to tens of thousands, per year, wasted by every young man and woman (all that money goes to people who hate us) who gets conned into thinking they can't survive without a jewish healthcare plan (they'll deny your claim after everything you've paid anyway, lol)
What is the percentage chance that is going to happen to a young man who would otherwise avoid tens of thousands in wasted earnings (annually) if he lived his life as though that wasn't a realistic contingency he needed to plan for? (It's not a realistic contingency, and acting like it is needs to stop)
>they say healthcare is tied to employment and loans are expensive
This is my only quip. I hate the way everyone just surrendered to this scam of an idea that you must have healthcare or you will go bankrupt and die at 25.
Your ancestors didn't have it for thousands of generations, and you're still here, so that means they didn't need it. You have their genetics, so just take care of your body, don't live like a nigger and drive the fuck on without your precious "healthcare."
Colossal waste of money for so many struggling young people, cordoning themselves into a shit job instead of being their own boss, because muh healthcare. Boils my blood.
The brain learns to produce chemicals that block certain receptors when you've done a certain drug for a while. It's part of why users build up tolerance, and the other part is the receptor getting burned out from over exposure.
Maybe your brain is treating pee like a drug and protecting you.
Someone, in the years between 2016 and 2025, said that in 1995 he heard Trump say some stuff in a limo. This isn't someone who saw it happen, and it isn't someone who made this claim 35 years ago when it allegedly was overheard.
How is this different from that women, Ford, who said the scotus nominee molested her in college?
I think they do understand the generalization. They just have different wiring to decide what happens next. They often know the statement is true, but that's not what is important to them.
Prompt: This [negative generalization] is associated with [familiar group].
Men: "This is a true statement, and points to the solution."
Women: "I know a person in that group and I must defend them."
From a man's problem-oriented perspective, this statement addresses a problem, and the path to the solution. It is objective, and the group can be conceptualized without subjective attachment.
From a woman's people-oriented perspective, this statement is an attack on a person she knows (or her), and cannot be approached objectively, at all.
Self-aware women know this about themselves, and instead of trying to overcome this instinct (God made them this way for a reason), they accept the conclusion, a man has to handle that problem.