Not the one. 🇺🇸🇨🇦🇷🇺💪#WeSeizeTheInitiative #СилаВПравде #СлаваУкраине #زن_زندگی_آزادی
Planet Fucking MARS
Joined October 2008
- Tweets8.7K
- Following303
- Followers189
- Likes3K
Pinned Tweet
To whom it may concern,
I mark like on all posts that I engage with, even when I disagree.
Because when I ring the bell, you get an electric shock and a food pellet.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.🙏
🤖 Made with AI
2
3
230
@SubduedRadical @MaggieMae_01 And next time around, when people realise nothing fundamentally changed for them, they'll swing back to the Republicans. Then back again. That's the cycle.
The incentive structure underneath doesn't change no matter who holds the seat. Donors, primaries, committee deals, reelection math. Swap the figurehead and the machine keeps producing the same outputs, so people get frustrated and play musical chairs with the parties.
It's like early humans believing the ice god was winning when it got colder and the sun god was winning when it warmed up, never realising it was just weather. Blaming Democrats, or Indians, or Muslims is the same move. You're making offerings to the wrong gods while the system that actually makes the weather never gets touched.
3
When an earlier stage of development wants to make a moral claim, it has to borrow rational sounding language. That's the shadow Orange move: dress up an appeal to authority as evidence. Same move when you assert American energy is cheaper than Russian energy without the numbers behind it. Sounds like analysis. Functions as assertion.
It doesn't hold up once you actually apply rational scrutiny to it. Credentials aren't argument. Unfalsifiable and unverifiable by design.
Here's the real kicker though. From the inside it's indistinguishable from the real thing. The person making the move can't tell they're doing it. That's what makes it a stage limitation and not a lie.
My opinions my own and are based upon 72 years of life and a 30 year career as an engineer and CIA operations officer. I can back up anything I say. Very few of you can. Maybe you will later be able. Hope so.
1
30
Cow007 #🟦☦️ retweeted
This is the fate that the Anglo-Zionist alliance wants for all Slavs.
Fathers and sons are being dragged from the streets and torn away from their families, while those safely removed from the battlefield demand that the war continue to feed their thirst for blood and money.
For generations, Slavs have suffered some of the heaviest losses in Europe’s wars and have repeatedly been pitted against one another, from the World Wars to Yugoslavia and now Ukraine, while outside powers pursue their own geopolitical and economic interests.
Cow007 #🟦☦️ retweeted
The definition of a defensive versus an offensive weapon is whether the gun is in my hand or in yours.
@MFA_China I wish I had written that a permanent problem is a dilemma. I’d take a problem over a dilemma any day friend.
Yes, and the ledger is being scored on the wrong line.
Factories are a flow asset. Painful to lose, expensive to rebuild, but rebuildable. Capex, tooling, a decade, and a policy that means it. There is a price tag and it can be paid.
Endowment is a stock asset. It cannot be rebuilt at any price. Territorial integrity, arable land under a temperate rain line, petroleum in place, mineral basins, ice free ports, a navigable river system running through the farmland, two oceans and no serious land threat on either border.
Nobody has ever bought that. Nobody has ever built it. You either sit on it or you do not.
So run the trade again. One side gave up a reconstitutable asset and took cheap capital, cheap goods and a suppressed inflation print for thirty years. The other side accumulated the reconstitutable asset while remaining structurally short on everything that cannot be built.
A fifth of the planet's people on under a tenth of its arable land. Most of its crude arriving by sea. The soybeans, the ore, the energy, all of it moving through straits it does not control and cannot hold. Every forge in the world does not fix that, because a forge does not eat.
That is the asymmetry. One party can be cut off from inputs. The other party is the inputs.
Read as strategy rather than as decline it is coherent. Run the extraction phase while the terms are favorable, let the counterparty carry the capital costs and the environmental load and the wage suppression, then reprice access to the things they cannot substitute for when the arrangement stops paying. You do not have to like it. It scores.
Hollow GDP is a real problem and it is a solvable one. Being a manufacturing superpower on top of a resource deficit is a permanent one.
1
1
52
A post got 1.4K likes and 1.7K replies. Replies outnumbered likes. That ratio is the entire story and almost nobody in the thread noticed.
The post was fourteen words. Roughly: law enforcement will leave you alone if you aren't doing anything illegal.
Here is what happened next. One side agreed. The other arrived with case names, wrong-address raids, stop data, hit rates. The counterexamples were correct. Nothing moved.
When a perfect rebuttal produces zero movement, you didn't lose the argument. You measured the wrong property.
Convert the sentence to first person and you get: I am the kind of person to whom the law is a friend.
Nobody can post that. It's naked self-praise and it invites "nobody asked." So it gets laundered through general-proposition form. The speaker collects the full status benefit while appearing to make a disinterested observation about the world.
That's why fact-checking it fails structurally rather than tactically. The facts hit the packaging. The payload isn't in the packaging.
There are also two readings, and the sentence slides between them under pressure. Defended when challenged: most law-abiding people rarely have adversarial contact with police. True, boring, undisputed. Occupied when unchallenged: if you got bothered, you were doing something. The second one is the payload, and "doing anything illegal" is an escape hatch wide enough to swallow any case you bring. He ran. She resisted. There was a warrant. They shouldn't have been there.
You are feeding evidence into a machine built to convert evidence into confirmation.
Now the part people find hard. The contestability isn't a weakness in the post. It's the function.
Agreement anyone could reach by ordinary reasoning signals nothing. Agreement only loyalty explains signals a lot. Which is why the most disputable line in a post is usually the one that gets quoted approvingly. Those 1.4K likes were not 1.4K epistemic assessments. They were signatures.
And the 1.7K replies were the second roster. The people refuting supplied the distribution. Both sides finished with membership confirmed and nothing updated.
Same grammar, other direction, so you can see this isn't about the politics of it:
ACAB. Nobody is coming for your guns. Believe all women. The system worked.
Constative surface, avowal payload, elastic under challenge, sorts the room into two boxes. In every case the falsification response is available, easy, satisfying, and completely inert.
Strip the implied out-group out of the original sentence and check what's left. If everyone were left alone by police it would carry as much content as saying gravity leaves you alone if you don't jump off things. It means something only because some people are in the other box. It never has to name them. That's the deniability.
Here's what outlasts the thread.
Discretion is the operational substance of policing. Who to stop, what to charge, what to overlook, when to escalate. That judgment is the job.
The sentence recodes discretion as mechanism. Mechanisms are not accountable. You don't subpoena gravity.
So what gets transferred, for free, carried by volunteers on both sides of the reply thread, is legitimacy. Discretionary power laundered into rule-following and therefore out of the accountability frame entirely.
If you actually want to move someone, don't bring the casualty list. It reads as an attack on their safety and produces maximum lock.
Try this. Every officer picks who to stop, what to charge, and what to let go. That judgment is the job. A sentence that turns it into a law of physics isn't a compliment to police. It writes them out of their own profession.
Or price it. Take the claim as true, and then a department publishing every stop that turned up nothing has nothing to lose, because by the rule those stops don't exist. Post the data. If the rule is real the numbers are free.
1
1
110
Cow007 #🟦☦️ retweeted
So it was a result of the PIT manoeuvre as you say done at an improper time.
Thank you for correcting yourself on that because before you were confused regarding cause and effect..
Cow007 #🟦☦️ retweeted
@George_Friedman The Cold War ended in 1991. That is the standard dating and I do not think it is controversial. Your own Stratfor-era work forecast a renewed period of tension arriving around 2025, shorter in duration and lower in intensity than the first, and that has held up better than most forecasts from that period.
That same body of work argued it was in the American national interest to improve relations with Moscow, and in Moscow's interest to improve relations with Washington, with China as the shared reason. I think that has largely proven correct.
Where I break is the framing that follows from it. Treating the current period as Cold War 2.0 imports a bloc-and-ideology model into a situation that is not producing bloc behavior. What the alignments are actually tracking is resource position.
Look at the cases you list. India is not aligning on values, it is aligning on a border it cannot move and energy access it cannot substitute. Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan are not converging on a shared political system, they are converging on corridor control and on who prices what moves through it. Encirclement of Iran is a downstream consequence of that, not the organizing principle.
The piece the commentator ecosystem keeps erasing is European agency. Continental Europe carries a permanent resource deficit and has historically resolved it eastward, under whatever ideological vocabulary was locally available at the time. That is the structural read, and it is difficult to keep casting Europe as a passenger now that Europe is the party writing the checks for Ukraine.
Ideology is the communications layer. Resource position is the causal layer. Cold War 2.0 reads the first and misses the second.
Cow007 #🟦☦️ retweeted
NAFO trolls remind me exactly of Croatian propaganda from the 90s.
The same bloodlust dressed up as patriotism. The same dehumanization of entire populations. The same celebration of civilian casualties when they happen to the "right" people.
I watched Croatian media in the 90s. Every Serb was a monster. Every Serbian death was justified. Every act of ethnic cleansing got rebranded as "liberation." The hatred wasn't even hidden. It was policy with a press release.
NAFO operates the same way now. Every Russian is fair game. Every strike on Russian soil deserves applause. Every escalation is "Ukraine fighting back." They've turned war crimes into memes and call it activism.
What makes it worse? Most of these people are second or third generation. They didn't live through the wars. They inherited the hatred from grandparents who lost and never got over it.
The rage isn't about Ukraine. It's about historical scores they watched their families fail to settle. Poland, Baltics, parts of Finland. Their grandparents tried to destroy Russia and lost. Now they're cheering for round two from behind screens.
I survived actual war. I know what these people are really calling for. And watching them treat nuclear escalation like a video game while carrying grudges from conflicts they never fought is one of the most disturbing things I've seen online.
Cow007 #🟦☦️ retweeted
No argument on the objective. Ending the IRGC threat and the franchise model it exports is a fine thing to want, and I want it too.
But that is an objective, not a strategy. Strategy is how you get it, what you are willing to have happen on the way, and who pays for the transition. Both options on the table were delivery mechanisms with no theory of the disruption they produce, which is why they read as a coin flip.
Here is the line I would draw under it. A mature hegemon would rather author the upset than absorb it. If disruption is coming either way, and in that region it is, you want to be the one picking the timing, the terrain and the price. Initiating means you pick all three. Reacting means someone else already did.
Second thing, and this one is the tell. Watch who insists that international goodwill is load-bearing. That claim is only ever made by people who need us. It is not a description of our position, it is a lever on it. A deficit actor cannot say out loud "we need your protection, your market and your molecules," so it says "you are losing the world's respect."
We do not sell goodwill. We sell things that cannot be sourced anywhere else at that volume. You can hate the counterparty and still have to clear the invoice. That is fuck you, pay me, and it is the strongest position on the board.
The only way to lose it is to be talked out of it. Which is what the framing is for.
Cow007 #🟦☦️ retweeted
モラハラ加害者に
「ゴミはゴミ箱にちゃんと捨てて」
「バカにするようなことを言うのは辞めて」
などと人間として最低限のお願いをするとします。
すると
「お前だってゴミを放置したことがある」
「お前のこの前の◯◯という発言で自分は傷ついたが我慢した」
などと言って論点をずらし、最終的に「相手が悪い」とし自分が被害者になろうとします。
モラハラ加害者とはたかがゴミをゴミ箱に捨てて欲しいとお願いしただけで、ここまで揉めてしまうのです。
#モラハラ #自己愛性パーソナリティ障害
"Hundreds of millions of innocent deaths over the last few hundred years alone."
Run your own window. A few hundred years is roughly 1600 forward.
Two world wars. The Holocaust. The Great Leap Forward. Stalin's famines. The Congo Free State. India's colonial famines. The Atlantic slave trade. The Taiping Rebellion.
That's where your hundreds of millions actually are. European states, atheist states, and the colonial system.
You picked the timeframe and it indicts nearly everyone except the group you named.
If you studied this, cite it. That figure doesn't appear in any historiography I know of.
Islam is an actual death cult ideology, much like communism, and much like any collectivist ideology that destroys individual rights.
I’m a big fan of individual rights.
Yes, I am staunchly against Islam and all collectivist ideologies that are responsible for hundreds of millions of innocent deaths over the last few hundred years alone. I came to that conclusion by actually studying how damaging they are to society.
You came to your conclusion because you fell for propaganda made for illiterate peasants and now blame a scapegoat for the sins of others, and because you are stupid.
We are not the same.
1
58
Cow007 #🟦☦️ retweeted
It’s funny you can acknowledge the low iq conspiracies and view antisemitism as immora bigotry, yet you’re the exact same with Muslims lol. Talk about cognitive dissonance
Benjamin Greene commented on New York Post : "The cross-examination is aimed at the wrong target. If it lands, the actual problem walks.
A postpartum woman re..." openweb.com/share/3Hlr5iwnAt…
31
Cow007 #🟦☦️ retweeted
THE LATERAL MOVE, IN PUBLIC
The specimen
WogStalker's post contains exactly one factual assertion and it is true. There were over half a million Jews in Germany in 1933. He is not lying, and that is the point. The number is selected, not invented.
What it is doing is establishing familiarity, and familiarity is doing the real work: if Germans knew Jews well, the prejudice was a response to experience rather than to ignorance. Which is to say, it was earned.
He never writes that sentence. He does not have to. He establishes the premise and lets the reader complete it. Same architecture as Column C: never say stop taking your medication, only establish that the pill was never the answer, and let the reader draw the conclusion the seller cannot afford to write down.
The percentage is what breaks it. 505,000 out of 67 million is 0.75 percent, and the population was heavily urban-concentrated on top of that, which means the rural and small-town Germany where the party did its best recruiting had close to no Jewish presence at all. Familiarity is the one thing the number cannot support.
So the choice between the absolute and the rate is the entire argument, and it is made silently, before anything is claimed.
The pyramid, applied to its own thread
AUDIENCE IDENTITY: "these people" versus us. We are the ones being lied to.
MORAL CONFLICT: honesty against deception, stated as a contrast between groups.
THE VILLAIN: doubled. The subject of the claim and the people allegedly concealing it.
HIDDEN MANIPULATION: dishonesty "about even the smallest details" implies a system, not an error. Small lies imply coordination.
REVELATION: "Fascinating that." The posture of having noticed something rather than of arguing for something.
The top tier is not the payload. It is the recruitment surface. A noticer is a peer. A partisan is a level above you and has to be climbed to. Revelation framing is what makes the rung look flat.
Nobody in that thread is a Nazi
Nobody said so, nobody has to, and if you asked, the answer would probably be that Nazis are disgusting. The disgust is not a cover story. It can be entirely real and the frame still transports, because the badge and the frame are separate objects. The badge is what gets refused. The frame is what travels.
The same structure, one channel over
A friend of mine called the worldview disgusting in the same conversation that produced "were you there." Badge refused, epistemics imported. Then it widened on its own: the numbers, then every bit of history, then everything. Nobody argued her up that ladder. Each rung arrived as a question, and questions are lateral.
The tell
Ask what the statistic is doing. Arithmetic, or standing. A true number chosen to produce a false impression is not a factual error and cannot be corrected with facts, because the fact is already conceded.
Which is why the answer in both cases is the same and is not evidence. Refuse the format. The format is the elevator.
Cow007 #🟦☦️ retweeted
Yes, and there is one step past the cage.
The comfort of the known cage is not the end state. It is the enabling condition. What comes after is the moment the cage gets wheels.
Take your own example. The rules-based order was not discovered. It was engineered, and it was engineered for a specific pair of prisoners.
1945 did not produce a neutral architecture. It produced a containment structure built around the defeated. NATO's first secretary general described the purpose in a line everyone still quotes and nobody finishes: keep the Soviets out, the Americans in, and the Germans down. The Schuman Declaration is even more explicit about the physical layer. Pool coal and steel, the actual inputs to war-making, so that war between France and Germany becomes not merely unthinkable but materially impossible. That is not idealism. That is a lock on a supply chain, written by people who had just watched what happens when it stays open.
Japan got the same treatment with different hardware. Article 9 drafted under occupation, forces stationed on the islands, and a security guarantee that doubled as a leash.
So the cage was a literal cage. Purpose-built, load-bearing, and honest about it at the time.
Then seventy years passed and the inmates learned the building. Coal and steel became the EEC became the EU. The instrument designed to foreclose Continental Europe's eastward vector is now the instrument that runs it, complete with enlargement rounds, association agreements, and the vocabulary of integration. Article 9 was reinterpreted rather than repealed, which is the more durable method, and the spending targets keep climbing.
The cage did not fail. It was inherited.
Here is the tell, and it is textual rather than inferred. If the rules-based order were a principle it would be invoked symmetrically. It is invoked in one direction, by one set of actors, against the same vector the architecture was originally built to constrain. Strip the moral vocabulary and check whether the prescription changes. It does not. That means the vocabulary was never load bearing. It is paint on the truck.
Hitler called it socialism. Brussels calls it democratic integration. Same deficit, same eastward vector, new label on the bottle. The contents were never the label.
Your priests line is right but too kind. They are not only measuring virtue by the lines they drew. They are the maintenance crew keeping the frame credible enough to carry freight, and most of them believe it, which is exactly what makes the freight move cheaply.
Worth saying plainly: this is structural rather than political, which is why it will underperform and also why it is worth writing. Political content tells people which side they are on and converts on contact. Structural content asks them to hold a pattern that implicates whoever holds it. That trades reach for accuracy, and accuracy is the only status that compounds.
Cow007 #🟦☦️ retweeted
Constructs are scaffolding. Useful until the moment someone mistakes the poles and boards for the sky itself.
Nations, ideologies, markets, genders, moral codes, even the sacred “rules-based order” are all temporary frames we hammer together so the raw flux of reality doesn’t terrify us.
They keep the furniture in place. They also keep the windows shut.
The danger arrives when the frame becomes the faith.
When questioning the box is treated as violence against the box.
When priests of the construct (politicians, academics, influencers, generals) start measuring virtue by how tightly everyone stays inside the lines they drew.
Reality does not care about our blueprints.
Empires rise on one set of constructs and collapse when those constructs can no longer contain the forces they pretended to master.
The map is never the territory.
The moment we forget that, the territory starts rewriting the map in blood and irony.
The interesting people are never the ones defending the walls. They are the ones walking the perimeter at night, testing for weak spots, asking what becomes possible if the whole damn structure is only provisional.
Most prefer the comfort of the known cage.
That preference is the construct’s real power.