US Joe Biden News Megathread - The Other Biden Derangement Syndrome Thread (with a side order of Fauci Derangement Syndrome)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Let's pretend for one moment that he does die before the election, just for the funsies. What happens then? Will the nomination revert to option number 2, aka Bernie Sanders? Or will his running mate automatically replace him just the way Vice-President is supposted to step in after the Big Man in the White House chokes on a piece of matzo? Does he even have a running mate yet?
 
Vietnam was 10-1 KDR. That was lost as well.
We lost when the Congress started whining about a few thousand dead civilians during the Phoenix Program. I don't understand why, it was a war and the strategy of murdering VC and VC sympathizers while leaving little pieces of them scattered around the village was very effective.
 
Last edited:
For the Taiwan Situation - Right now, China isn't anywhere near a position where an invasion would be viable. The entirety of the Chinese Army that's currently located near Taiwan doesn't have the manpower to make an invasion viable. They could draw additional forces from their far borders, but this would be a long and obvious move, and would involve removing significant quantities of troops from places like the Indian Border, and the borders of other nations that actively hate them. It'd be begging for them to get opened up to a multi front conflict in SE Asia.

And this is without additional US support on the ground, mind you - Just focusing on the current active numbers of the Taiwanese Army. ~150k active personnel, plus reserves. For a successful amphibious landing, most estimates would have the attacker aim for as high as a Seven to One ratio of attackers to defenders. So even disregarding the incredible naval lift effort that would be needed to actually put those troops on Taiwan, China just doesn't have 750k-1M troops just chilling immediately near Taiwan. To put that into context, they've only got 2 million or so active duty, and that's covering all their borders.

If China was truly preparing for an invasion that would succeed, it'd be impossible to conceal. If they tried to YOLO it with what they've got available now, It'd be a bloodbath, they'd be lucky to actually take any major points, and would be unable to effectively support and supply them as they're holdings are routed back into the sea. Taiwan's been planning this defense for decades, with the US's assistance.

If the US got actively involved as well, they'd turn the entire Taiwan Strait in Chink Dumpling Soup before they got onto the beaches. The TL;DR of that is that you beat a numerically superior enemy with technology and good planning, or you beat a technologically superior enemy with numbers and good planning. When the enemy has (Effective) numerical superiority, technological superiority, and actual combat experience to base good planning off of, its gonna be a nightmare to fight them. And thats what China's dealing with. Even the Woke chiefs of incompetence can only go so far to torpedo the US's operational advantages.
 
20,000 gallons of gasoline under the ground... WHAT?
At the turn of around 1920 his dad worked for the Milk & Oil Company and went door to door asking people if they'd like 20,000 gallons of gasoline buried under their house, and they didn't want it!!!
He was talking about how people were reluctant to allow companies to build filling stations back in the 1920 because they thought that they would blow up and kill everyone. No idea of the context and he loves talking in 1950s slang, because of dementia and that's the only time period he can still sort of remember. But only mumbly and stupid rather than word salad.
 
Isn't Taiwan a mountainous island? Like, actual real-ass mountains?
it's entire eastern side is, which conveniently makes any attempted landings predictably on the west and north coasts only, since trying to land a significant force in the east would be monumentally stupid and harder. and even if they succeeded with the initial landings, they could retreat and do guerilla warfare in said mountains later, yes
 
Isn't Taiwan a mountainous island? Like, actual real-ass mountains?
Not just mountains, but almost completely impassible jungle mountains right out of a Kung Fu flick, and the west coast is bugman hive, or in other words... urban warfare taken up to 11. The only "safe" landing spot has a mountain island fortress that is also right out of a Kung Fu flick guarding passage, and the straits are notoriously difficult to navigate, being only 490 feet deep and therefore no shortage of tiny islands and outcroppings poking out. Planning an assault across the strait would make Overlord look like child's play. And the total planning for that, including preliminaries, lasted years.
 
We lost when the Congress started whining about a few thousand dead civilians during the Phoenix Program. I don't understand why, it was a war and the strategy of murdering VC and VC sympathizers while leaving little pieces of them scattered around the village was very effective.
An example of when we actually adapt and out guerilla the supposed "masters". When we actually put in effort to fight dirty, we can be surprisingly effective at it.

The result isn't pretty and people get squeamish. Don't fight the damn war in the first place if you don't have the stomach for it.

But hey, gotta make that money.
 
The Tet offensive was a great psychological victory for them. A bunch of rice farmers basically destroyed talking points of the government that war was winnable and stuff was under control.
Which was really only something they realized a while after the fact. In the short run the NVA viewed Tet and the attempted follow up offensives they launched as a disaster and their goal of inciting a mass uprising in the South was an abject failure. The South Vietnamese actually ended up more determined to fight in the short run, and ARVN morale was pretty high until they bit off more than they could chew and failed miserably in Laos a couple of years later. The American public on the other hand...
 
I don't know how though. The Chinese carriers are total garbage for projecting power, the reason why people joke about ski-ramp carriers is that in order to take off from them, you have to sacrifice load. Those fighters can't launch quickly, can't carry much fuel, can't carry a significant amount of ordinance and then would have to penetrate an air-defense network still at least a generation ahead of them. Their subs are right out, there's always at least one SSN with a battlegroup and in an actual war there'll be more out there hunting. The squids are still good.

Never mind an Ohio SSGNs launching the mother of all cruise missile strikes from beyond the range that the Chinese can respond. Their Navy looks nice and clean and painted and such, but that's because they never really go anywhere or do anything. Almost all Chinese military doctrine is theory, they have almost no real practice and none against peers. That matters. Take Japan, they'll have their Not Carriers ready in a few years, but it'll take much longer to get them back to speed on proper carrier group operations. They've been out of that business for decades and it'll probably take at least one to get the experience to really do it well. The Chinese have nothing in terms of practical experience.


Afghanistan is kind of a special case that no one can really deal with, that's why it's the graveyard of Empires. The last Chinese got practical military experience it was fighting the Jungle Asians that they share a land border with and getting their asses kicked. They got into a stick fight with the street shitters and neither side accounted for it self well. The Chinese want you to see them as some hyper-competent military juggernaut because they're all about face. They march well, because it looks impressive, their navy is all nice and freshly painted because it looks impressive. They want to distract you from an army full of manlets that's never been in a serious fight and a navy that looks good because it does fuck all. Face is everything to China and they don't like to fight because historically they've sucked at everything but attrition warfare. And even then how many times did China get its ass kicked by foreign powers on their own soil?

The answer is "all the fucking time." China sucks donkey nuts at any war that's not a Civil War.

After all, no one has killed as many Chinese as Chinese have. Chinese are best at killing the Chinese.
 
It doesn't appear as though anybody's seen it yet, but I was wrong about the Supreme Court throwing out legal forced sterilization in regards to Pennsylvania passing forced sterilization legislation on men over 40 or having their third child. Lemme give you the lo' down.

Forced sterilization was excused away by the theory of eugenics & forced sterilizations started happening in the late 1800s, specifically for the mentally handicapped & criminally incarcerated before there were any laws regarding it which raged on until the 1940s, slowed by the 1960's but continues today. One of the first applications of this behavior occurred at the Kansas State Asylum for Idiotic and Imbecile Youth in 1894 by Dr. Hoyt Pilcher who sterilized both male & female patients at the ward.

1907 was when the first law permitting it passed in Indiana by Governor Frank J. Hanly under the pretense that "criminality, mental problems, and pauperism were hereditary" & "we owe it not only to ourselves, but to the future of our race and nation, to see that the defective and diseased do not multiply". After this legislation passed into law in Indiana, 30 other states followed suit & the Mengele-esque fun began.

Enter Buck Vs. Bell in 1927, the first serious case of forced sterilization to enter into the Supreme Court in which the Supreme Court sided with sterilizing young woman Carrie Buck out of the state of Virginia. Buck was an inmate at the Virginia Colony for the Feebleminded because she had a baby out of wedlock. This ruling meant that states now had the police power to carry out forced sterilizations, a fate which befell Carrie Buck after she had her first baby.

It was stated by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. that '‘three generations of imbeciles are enough".

Between the years of 1928 to 1932 it was found that women were sterilized twice as often as men were. Inb4 "based" comments because "it's okay when it happens to the sex I don't like." More than half of the 30,000 known sterilizations occurred in California. I am shocked to hear California would commit such an atrocity⸮

North Carolina would coerce people into undergoing sterilizations by threatening their social service benefits. Basically the same shit as China's Social Credit program where you can't ride the bus if your score is too low; dystopian.

Enter Skinner Vs. Oklahoma 1942 in which ruled against Oklahoma's Sterilization Act of 1935. This law operated on a three strikes rule in which sterilized anyone caught committing three crimes or more which amounted to a felony. It was found that this violated the 14th amendment & the Supreme Court deemed it unconstitutional.

This didn't explicitly outlaw force sterilization however, while although several states began gutting their own legislation making it legal, but it didn't overturn Belle Vs. Buck & remains legal as its own legislation & forced sterilization continues to this day.

Sterilization continues to be incentivized to be used on inmates to this day, most often but not exclusively done to child predators, even giving them lighter sentences if they agree to the sterilization. I have no idea how a dry sneeze is supposed to prevent more sexual assault when it's most prevalent in prison.

One particular case includes Barbara & Ronald Gross who were found to have abused their own children in 1993 who were offered probation instead of conviction if they took the sterilization. I disagree with this because it wouldn't do anything to stop them from being predators & they belong in prison.

Many forced prison sterilizations of women were unlawful in nature, as over a hundred women in California were forcibly sterilized between 2006 & 2010. Targets of such forced sterilizations were those thought to become repeat offenders in the future, so forced sterilization was administered as a punishment for pre-crime.

Even though forced sterilizations on the mentally handicapped ceased since the 1960s, Relf v. Weinberger 1974 found that poor people were being threatened denial of welfare benefits & medical care if they didn't take sterilizations. Black women were victims of force sterilization under the pretext of receiving "appendectomies" which were undertaken by medical students unknowingly performing hysterectomies.

Recent allegations include border hoppers being given sterilization treatments under false pretenses as described by whistleblower Dawn Wooten. Ironic.

So there you have it, sterilization was never explicitly made illegal by the Supreme Court but remains a seldom used treatment for inmates & coerced treatment for illegal immigrants.

So yes, Pennsylvania can absolutely pass this forced vasectomy legislature & enforce it with Supreme Court precedent backing them. Get out of Pennsylvania while you can LMAO.
Right, now that I can focus on it, I need to point out that this is wrong but for a reason you'd easily be forgiven for not realizing.

You'll notice around 1973 all the cases were losses that, while not outright banning forced sterilization, all struck down those statutes. What happened in 1973?

Roe v. Wade.

Fun fact, Roe doesn't make abortion legal or more specifically doesn't make stopping abortion illegal. It merely places a nearly insurmountable legal barrier to any law which would. On the same side, it puts the same barrier on any law which would force sterilization. The only way that the sterilization bill in Pennsylvania could be found constitutional, would be to argue that Roe is bad law.
 
Last edited:
Which was really only something they realized a while after the fact. In the short run the NVA viewed Tet and the attempted follow up offensives they launched as a disaster and their goal of inciting a mass uprising in the South was an abject failure. The South Vietnamese actually ended up more determined to fight in the short run, and ARVN morale was pretty high until they bit off more than they could chew and failed miserably in Laos a couple of years later. The American public on the other hand...
Exactly why I can never take anyone bitching about modern news while hoisting up Kronkite as some kind of shining example of good journalism seriously. Dude was a faggot propagandist just like modern journos.
 
Which was really only something they realized a while after the fact. In the short run the NVA viewed Tet and the attempted follow up offensives they launched as a disaster and their goal of inciting a mass uprising in the South was an abject failure. The South Vietnamese actually ended up more determined to fight in the short run, and ARVN morale was pretty high until they bit off more than they could chew and failed miserably in Laos a couple of years later. The American public on the other hand...
The blame for that rests squarely on walter cronkite and CBS. They ran the story that the Tet offensive was a disaster for the united states military, outright lying about casualties and gains on both sides. It cemented public opinion - and more importantly, political opinion - against the war. The US could have completely overrun the Vietnamese in another year.
 
I’m going to disagree with this common “cars are evil and ruin cities” take that Reddit and YouTube lefties always seem to have. Having a car and being able to travel anywhere in minutes at anytime is almost a miracle (especially if you had to rely on spotty public transit for 15 years or walking/cycling in horrible weather, limiting how far you can travel for what services). Getting a car and being able to skip those problems has been amazing for me and I’m starting to think people who hate cars and cities catering to drivers are spoiled and don’t realize how good they have it. These same people are the ones voting and passing laws to make driving more hard and more expensive so that everyone else suffers (“people must suffer for doing something I hate!”). “Oh, just take the bus or cycle” they scream at you w/o realizing you have a job where you need to be on-call 24/7 (or any other context making public transit impossible).

Live in pod within walking distance to “Eat a Bug!” ration station and kill the car along with freedom of movement beyond walking (and walking will be deemed ableist soon enough). You will be happy.

Fuck that.

The only other human invention that has fundamentally changed so much day-to-day living has been the smart phone. We’ve already started changing our architecture and design to accommodate this. When the automobile became nearly universal in 20th Century America, we did that same thing.

In regards to making cities ugly, yes, this is true, but it doesn’t have to be that way. Perhaps the automobile puts a much-needed limit on population densities and these ugly cities are trying to surpass that limit (which is why they’re horrible)? This whole issue is much more nuanced and I’m sick of this “cars are evil” oversimplification.

*rant over*
I agree with you about cars, but disagree that the problem is nuanced. It's literally just fucking niggers. And other third worlders. And mixing peoples in general results in incongruent vision and ugly results.

It really is as simple, conceptually at least, as having a united people with a united vision. Individualism, leftism, and multiculturalism, by theory and practice, only beget ugliness, which alone is enough of a basis on which to know these things are evil, not that there isn't further evidence of that.
 
Last edited:
Reminder that the world is getting overpopulated and muh climate change and hunger so middle-class white people should stop having kids but China has built literal cities that sit empty on vast swaths of land that could've been developed as farmland and wildlife reserves because...because???
Because real estate is the only thing bugmen can invest in.
 
it's entire eastern side is, which conveniently makes any attempted landings predictably on the west and north coasts only, since trying to land a significant force in the east would be monumentally stupid and harder. and even if they succeeded with the initial landings, they could retreat and do guerilla warfare in said mountains later, yes
This is what the Romans said about Hannibal.

I don't have a point. Just asking if the Chinese have elephants in their landing forces.
 
This is what the Romans said about Hannibal.

I don't have a point. Just asking if the Chinese have elephants in their landing forces.
No, but the Taiwanese do have 24/7 satellite coverage. And the Chinese would need to do a -lot- of shipping to get to those mountains and have any chance of having a useful fighting force.
 
Afghanistan isn't really a good example though. So many powerful nations have tried to conquer it and failed. Seems the irony is that stone age societies are unconquerable by modern societies.

The USA is like a boxer with no ground game. They can punch someone in the face real hard, but when it goes to the mat they flail about like a beached seal.
 
How did Korea go? I bet we really kicked some Chinese ass!
USA Goals: Save South Korea, maybe reconquer North Korea.
CCP Goals: Drive Amerifats off the Korean peninsula so they can't build air bases to strike Beijing.

Results: USA looses some dudes, tries and fails to take NK. South Korea still stands. CCP looses their entire PLA Army Group North, the only guys they had trained in amphibious warfare AKA the guys they were going to use to take Taiwan. USA Air bases are established. Mao's son gets killed, putting his succession plans into disarray.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back