Tactical Fitness: The Elite Strength and Conditioning Program for Warrior Athletes and the Heroes of Tomorrow including Firefighters, Police, Military and Special Forces https://a.co/d/hZssglg
The problem, FD, is that the training in the U.S. military has been radically softened to accommodate females, homos, lesbians, trannys, and every mongrel and freak imaginable. This rot has even permeated the elite units. There are now female Rangers, the males refer to them contemptuously as, "Rangerettes." They are only required to do a fraction of the physical and mental demands placed upon the men to pass training. Soon, as more and more females fill the training ranks, the military will have no choice but to pussy it out for them all. Again, this holds for the elite units in every branch. Take away their high tech toys of mayhem, and Uncle Saul's, Red, White, and Blue, six pointed star, Woke machine couldn't whip a catholic girls junior high school at tiddly winks. Hardly the training a real warrior requires to succeed in battle.
Rangerettes I believe is actually term for the WHORES trying to fuck Rangers in the regiment.
Have standards laxed? For sure, but the requirements for special operations units like the 75th haven’t changed all that much. And the men that gravitate to the military are still primarily our kind of people.
Not any more, FD. Every study on the subject shows an ever decreasing percentage of White southern men, the bedrock of the enlisted ranks, joining the military. Many already in are getting out instead of making it a career like they originally intended. It seems these guys have no desire to take orders from females, fagots, lesbians, trannys, and mongrels of every description, who are regularly promoted over them despite the obvious fact they are not only less qualified for promotion than the southern men (or any white man in general), they are not qualified at all. If you are a male in the military and decide to become female, or a female that wants to be male, Uncle Saul will happily foot the bill for the entire gender switch procedures. Not to be redundant, but special ops are carried out by the elite units and as more and more of these Woke freaks fill the training ranks of these units, the Brass will have no choice but to dramatically lower the standards for everybody. The U.S. military has long been the province of demented social engineering by our Hebraic overlords.
Good read. What you have to define, however, is how the war you have in mind materializes. If you think WW2 or Vietnam-style combat, you are right. Even civil war like in Spain, or today’s middle east, you may be right.
However, is this what the west is facing? Or is it more the slow decay into street and everyday violence, that the warriors of the right will have to prepare for? Then, there are two thoughts: Martial Arts of any sort surely are good way to prepare for 1-1 combat without weapons. But, look at the weight of mma fighters, this training is highly catabolic.
Bodybuilding, and acquiring physical mass, is preparation for defense. That is, you have to built up your body so it can sustain more damage. Strength is a nice feat, but I am serious when I mean that muscle simply helps you survive attacks that would shatter the average 150 pound body.
Even in modern street fighting, your ability to run from cover to cover, building to building going to be most important. Combative are also taught in the military.
Maybe you missed one thing and that is having no fear of death. Ability to face death was traditionally main characteristic of warrior nobility. Most of us who train today and are maybe fit enough to pass selection process in some military, would fail the test when faced with the real war situation.
There are also men who are internally structured in a way that they function better in war time than piece time. They enjoy high tension which war brings, living on the edge, etc. They have hard time living typical bourgeois life most men live today. This is a good way to select men for war.
There is also the issue of the definition of the term "war". War changed so much just in the last 100 years or so. Weapons are so destructive and there is increasing involvement of smart machines in war. It is hard to say to what extent is man an active participant in that kind of war, or just an object of passive destruction.
In the end there is also a racial (not just skin color) component which was traditionally important in those who called themselves warriors. Before war became democratized and the masses were involved in large-scale conflicts, war was the business of very few men, specifically warrior and to some extent priestly nobility.
I rejoice in this bright-coloured future. For the soldier war is the normal state of things … If I fall, it is the most honorable and beautiful death. - Paul von Hindenburg
"Weapons are so destructive and there is increasing involvement of smart machines in war. It is hard to say to what extent is man an active participant in that kind of war, or just an object of passive destruction." - Very true indeed. Seeing the videos from Ukraine where unsuspecting soldiers are blown to pieces by drones dropping bombs from above make you think. There is absolutely nothing soldiery let alone honorable about this kind of war. Typical soldier feats and skills become absolutely worthless. Imagine a fat trans degenerate sitting in a bunker dropping drone bombs on actual men in the trench.
Evola and Junger talk about the possibilities of "total war" to represent the ultimate challenge for men, primarily because of their destructiveness. But they were writing in the context of WW2 and to some extent Cold War, and could not imagine what we have today.
Maybe it is better to avoid this kind of war, but if there is no other choice, then take what's left of war (in a higher sense) in what war represents today. Maybe it is better do die in that kind of war than in some 15-minute city in some kind of climate lockdown.
if that death serves a higher purpose, e.g. to avoid 15 minute cities for my kids, then yes. But reality as of now in Ukraine is probably the most senseless slaughter ever in the history of mankind. There is absolutely no higher purpose, on both sides. Not even glory for its own sake is to be achieved
Tactical Fitness: The Elite Strength and Conditioning Program for Warrior Athletes and the Heroes of Tomorrow including Firefighters, Police, Military and Special Forces https://a.co/d/hZssglg
The problem, FD, is that the training in the U.S. military has been radically softened to accommodate females, homos, lesbians, trannys, and every mongrel and freak imaginable. This rot has even permeated the elite units. There are now female Rangers, the males refer to them contemptuously as, "Rangerettes." They are only required to do a fraction of the physical and mental demands placed upon the men to pass training. Soon, as more and more females fill the training ranks, the military will have no choice but to pussy it out for them all. Again, this holds for the elite units in every branch. Take away their high tech toys of mayhem, and Uncle Saul's, Red, White, and Blue, six pointed star, Woke machine couldn't whip a catholic girls junior high school at tiddly winks. Hardly the training a real warrior requires to succeed in battle.
Rangerettes I believe is actually term for the WHORES trying to fuck Rangers in the regiment.
Have standards laxed? For sure, but the requirements for special operations units like the 75th haven’t changed all that much. And the men that gravitate to the military are still primarily our kind of people.
Not any more, FD. Every study on the subject shows an ever decreasing percentage of White southern men, the bedrock of the enlisted ranks, joining the military. Many already in are getting out instead of making it a career like they originally intended. It seems these guys have no desire to take orders from females, fagots, lesbians, trannys, and mongrels of every description, who are regularly promoted over them despite the obvious fact they are not only less qualified for promotion than the southern men (or any white man in general), they are not qualified at all. If you are a male in the military and decide to become female, or a female that wants to be male, Uncle Saul will happily foot the bill for the entire gender switch procedures. Not to be redundant, but special ops are carried out by the elite units and as more and more of these Woke freaks fill the training ranks of these units, the Brass will have no choice but to dramatically lower the standards for everybody. The U.S. military has long been the province of demented social engineering by our Hebraic overlords.
Good read. What you have to define, however, is how the war you have in mind materializes. If you think WW2 or Vietnam-style combat, you are right. Even civil war like in Spain, or today’s middle east, you may be right.
However, is this what the west is facing? Or is it more the slow decay into street and everyday violence, that the warriors of the right will have to prepare for? Then, there are two thoughts: Martial Arts of any sort surely are good way to prepare for 1-1 combat without weapons. But, look at the weight of mma fighters, this training is highly catabolic.
Bodybuilding, and acquiring physical mass, is preparation for defense. That is, you have to built up your body so it can sustain more damage. Strength is a nice feat, but I am serious when I mean that muscle simply helps you survive attacks that would shatter the average 150 pound body.
Even in modern street fighting, your ability to run from cover to cover, building to building going to be most important. Combative are also taught in the military.
Building muscle IS importance but it’s
secondary to your ability to move.
Maybe you missed one thing and that is having no fear of death. Ability to face death was traditionally main characteristic of warrior nobility. Most of us who train today and are maybe fit enough to pass selection process in some military, would fail the test when faced with the real war situation.
There are also men who are internally structured in a way that they function better in war time than piece time. They enjoy high tension which war brings, living on the edge, etc. They have hard time living typical bourgeois life most men live today. This is a good way to select men for war.
There is also the issue of the definition of the term "war". War changed so much just in the last 100 years or so. Weapons are so destructive and there is increasing involvement of smart machines in war. It is hard to say to what extent is man an active participant in that kind of war, or just an object of passive destruction.
In the end there is also a racial (not just skin color) component which was traditionally important in those who called themselves warriors. Before war became democratized and the masses were involved in large-scale conflicts, war was the business of very few men, specifically warrior and to some extent priestly nobility.
I rejoice in this bright-coloured future. For the soldier war is the normal state of things … If I fall, it is the most honorable and beautiful death. - Paul von Hindenburg
"Weapons are so destructive and there is increasing involvement of smart machines in war. It is hard to say to what extent is man an active participant in that kind of war, or just an object of passive destruction." - Very true indeed. Seeing the videos from Ukraine where unsuspecting soldiers are blown to pieces by drones dropping bombs from above make you think. There is absolutely nothing soldiery let alone honorable about this kind of war. Typical soldier feats and skills become absolutely worthless. Imagine a fat trans degenerate sitting in a bunker dropping drone bombs on actual men in the trench.
Evola and Junger talk about the possibilities of "total war" to represent the ultimate challenge for men, primarily because of their destructiveness. But they were writing in the context of WW2 and to some extent Cold War, and could not imagine what we have today.
Maybe it is better to avoid this kind of war, but if there is no other choice, then take what's left of war (in a higher sense) in what war represents today. Maybe it is better do die in that kind of war than in some 15-minute city in some kind of climate lockdown.
if that death serves a higher purpose, e.g. to avoid 15 minute cities for my kids, then yes. But reality as of now in Ukraine is probably the most senseless slaughter ever in the history of mankind. There is absolutely no higher purpose, on both sides. Not even glory for its own sake is to be achieved