anonymous
2018-10-10 11:34:50 UTC
Why would anyone knowingly militarily serve a nation (that is, even when the conflicts are just, which they almost never are) inherently opposed to the following?
1) Maximum protection against internal threats (lack of political or cultural safeguards against subversive elements, lack of proper and rigid national (including racial, which has massive tactical value) definition, etc)
2) Maximum protection against external threats (Islam and Islamification with all of their destructive and deadly effects (like the September 11th attacks), extensive belligerent African and Hispanic activity (a large amount of criminal gangs, some of which exhibit extreme violence, like MS-13), hostile espionage, alien tribal subversion (Hello, 2009 Fort Hood Shooting, grievance-mongering, etc). These aspects are all enabled by uninhibited racial heterogeneity and continue to be so.
3) Measures against cultural degradation (degradation includes promotion and embracement of tattoos, piercings, loutish behaviour, great focus on trivial aspects, indecent dressing, etc, with no relevant regulatory bodies to monitor the situation).
4) Maximum general physical attractiveness (instead of just starting and stopping with British and Scandinavian composition to secure high general beauty, it was decided that other racial types should be added, with the result being a severe reduction of proportion of good-looking people in society). The proportion