Woke Military

..Man this stuff is depressing, but I've never liked the U.S. military to begin with. All I know is my Uncle did serve in the Airforce at one point in his life, he use to load weapons onto the planes. But when he came out of the service, he was so messed up in the head he tried to commit suicide. Police officers prevented him from doing it, then he had to stay with my grandmother for awhile until he eventually got better and left. Truth be told, I can't see myself ever fighting for the U.S. military...They went from fighting wars for bankers who already own half the world to this and I don't see a single soul resisting it. The thing is, all this started when they first let women in. Back in the WWII days it was a lot different than how things are now but I can't see myself fighting alongside of the people they have in the military today. Just imagine getting shot or hurt, and then some tranny soldier coming to your aid and that's given they are willing to die to drag you out of harms way...Still I'd rather let the enemy get me than to be saved by a leftist soldier.
Canada takes the lead
canada dot mil tattoos.JPG

Official FAQ
Can the different gender design of the DEU uniforms be intermixed or must CAF members only wear either the “female” pattern or the “male” pattern?
DEUs are no longer gender based. Both catalogues are open to all members and they may be intermixed.

References to gender have been removed but traditionally gendered items like skirts, nylons, and purses are still part of CAF dress. Does this mean that CAF members who identify as men can wear skirts?
Yes, it does.The overall aim of the updated Canadian Forces Dress Instructions is to make the policy more inclusive and less prohibitive, and to allow CAF members increased freedom to make personal choices regarding their appearance, providing that safety and operational effectiveness are always maintained.

In operational dress (order of dress 5), is there a limit to the number of ear-piercings that are acceptable?
In general, there are no restrictions unless there is a safety issue or operational effectiveness may be jeopardized.

Are backpacks required to be slung over both shoulders?
A backpack can be worn slung over both shoulders, or over the left shoulder; this leaves the right arm free to salute.
And more :laughter:
Canada takes the lead
View attachment 44619

Official FAQ

And more :laughter:
There actually is a practical reason for this, it's not just full on clown world. They want thugs in the military. People who will do anything for money.

As they transfer from world police to 1984 domestic enforcers, they will increasingly want these guys in the military (as opposed to your masculine bible belt guys with morals):

White women in the American army are among the most privileged people in the world. As long as they are not super fat, the world is their oyster. Having several kids from different soldiers is an easy way to live the high life for them if they lack scruples (as I assume she does considering how hardcore pro-abortion she is).

Assuming she is immoral and selfish, why kill off her golden geese? The army will guarantee that soldiers that impregnate her will have to pay child support. American Women benefit the most from having Roe V. Wade overturned and would benefit even more if abortion were illegal everywhere.
That isn't the only woman doing so. Two years ago, they did a feature on a female pilot.

That same pilot today:

For the first time in her life, Marine Corps Capt. Meleah Martin is refusing to wear American flag attire this Independence Day. Instead, she told her family that she will only wear pride colors and apparel. Not because she's unpatriotic – she's spent approximately 16 months deployed overseas as an F-18 pilot. But because she believes her constitutional rights are under attack.

Martin said it's been disheartening to witness liberties such as the right to protest or to cast a ballot come under attack in recent years. Those frustrations turned to devastation for her with the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, stripping away the constitutional right to an abortion. Martin hopes to someday start a family, but as someone who identifies as a lesbian, she's scared her right to marry and have children may also be in danger.

As a result of these fears and frustrations, she said she doesn't look at the American flag the way she used to.

"We swear an oath, 'To support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic' ... Well, it's time to start worrying about the domestic, because clearly we have more of a problem here than we do anywhere else," Martin said, noting that her views are her own, and not a reflection of her unit or the Marine Corps. "It's really disappointing when something like this happens, because, like, how do I defend that?"

The article goes on to interview a Catholic service member.

Twenty-three-year-old Natalia Ketcham has two months left on her enlistment with the Coast Guard, after which she plans to attend school to become a dental hygienist. She's originally from Miami, but is stationed outside of San Francisco. Like Martin and LaGroon, she too is concerned about the state of things, albeit for different reasons.

Ketcham has been against abortion since she was a pre-teen. Her stance doesn't stem from her Roman Catholic beliefs, she explained, but from her love of life itself.

"I firmly believe that abortion is not a constitutional right, we all have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, first and foremost, life," she said.

When the justices voted to return abortion laws to individual states, she was elated. However, as a staunch anti-abortion advocate, she believes there's more work to be done.

"I think that this is a great first step in advancing our generations, our future generations, and I think that's great. But we are nowhere near done," Ketcham said. "So as happy as I am, I am not complacent with where we are at. And I think that's important for pro-lifers to really understand, is that our struggle is not done."

Such a divided force would not be able fight effectively in a war due to the lack of cohesiveness.
I can't stand all these schlubs who say the US has the greatest fighting force in the world and because Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea do not go into expansionist conquests that they are somehow inferior. The US is great at spending money on training and equipment, but there will be no real proof of who wins the pissing contest for best military unless things go hot. My money is on the men who are fighting for their lands, their history, their people, their way of life, whether or not their state government is better or worse than the US' current regime. Someone fighting for money or college or to prove some point will always fall short on the battlefield compared to one who neither needs nor wants these things. The spawns of satan are willing to give their lives for their globohomo feelgood order, until they're not. That includes all women, sexual deviants, pedophiles, gang members, and other immoral cretins that infest the ranks of the current US armed forces. The only thing keeping this house of cards alive is the upper crust of the boomer system and the last vestiges of the fiat pyramid. I pray everyday for this divided house to fall on itself, the sooner this gets over with, the better.
Funny how blacks in the military didn't seem to have this attitude or if they did, it didn't manifest itself like this. And they had legitimately more reason to be upset - imagine seeing your fellow black soldiers die and be wounded in combat and come back to enjoy partial rights in many places. Yet they conducted themselves above board and excelled many times in their own elite units.

Shows the problem truly is women, namely white women.
It really is retarded that pretty much any adult can vote, just for existing. It should be a responsibility that's earned, and not a right.

"Voting" doesn't really mean anything anyways, so who cares at this point.

Yeah, I don't particularly agree with the idea that women shouldn't vote. I don't mean that as a carte blanche that they should, but rather that a good deal of men shouldn't be allowed to vote either. Essentially the system is one of the inmates running the asylum. zI remember in university someone arguing that corporations were fundamentally undemocratic (ignoring the role of shareholders I suppose), but is absolutely true in the capacity of the workers. But why should it be? Let the workers run the show and they will vote for 100% raises while the company runs itself into the ground.

No one votes for what will lead to a strong prosperous country for all, but rather, are so short sighted as to vote what's good for them. At least in Canada, close to half of people pay no net tax. Why should they get a say? If you come to my party, eat my pizza, and drink my beer, and contribute nothing, should you get a say in what I serve?

The economy and inflation is off the rails. Now many are upset at the gov't/central banks for allowing rates to rise. They have so little foresight/self discipline/delayed gratification/impulse control, that if you offer them a mortgage at record low rates that are only set to increase, while the values of what they buy with it are only set to decrease, they will still line up around the block if you offer it to them. me me me!, now now now! Despite money potentially becoming worthless, these people would probably vote for 0% rates forever if monetary policy was democratic.

The point is, is that to get a say at the table, you need to bring something to the table. Skin in the game. Anyone should be able to vote, but it shouldn't be an automatically conferred right, and non-heritable to avoid corrupt dynasties. Wealthy land owners, people who pay net tax, people who've served in the military or other significant civil service. No one votes for a strong country. They vote for the person who promises the most gibs, and that has led us to here.