When did pointless dying become a good thing?

Cannon fodder posing.

A Swedish soldier was killed in Afghanistan on Saturday, he wasn’t the first, and he won’t be the last.

To me a dead soldier isn’t really the worst thing. His grieving family may make me sad, and since he died for useless cause in a country we have no business being in, I do get a tad upset. However neither of those things are what I feel is the worst about this fiasco.

The worst thing is that so many within the general public feel it is a good thing for Swedish soldiers to fight and die in a war across the globe in a country and against a people that has done absolutely nothing to us. No Taliban has ever attacked Sweden, or hardly anyone else for that matter. Yes, sure they are a horrible women hating bunch, but the puppets now ruling the country isn’t much better. And as mentioned many times before, if all we need is a women hating regime with another religion in a far away country for us to send soldiers to, our supplies of manpower would dwindle very fast. If that’s the criteria there are more countries on the planet to send soldiers to than the opposite.

IF we’d been attacked, if we really were in a defensive war I would get behind the Swedish military 100%, hell I would probably apply to join and put myself in danger to protect my family and friends. This isn’t the case here; we are involved in a conflict we have absolutely nothing to do with. There’s no reason for us to be there, no argument valid and no enemy to fight.

These soldiers coming home in coffins are not dying honorable deaths or getting blown up for good cause, they are not defending Sweden or their own families. They are meaninglessly dying for absolutely no reason at all, in a conflict we have absolutely nothing to do with, in a country far, far away that has done nothing against us.

And seemingly many Swedes think this is great. Looking at polls in papers and looking at how absent reactions are, a majority or close to it think we should stay in Afghanistan and that we are doing a great job. Why? Why the hell do they think that? What can possibly be gain from this?

Sweden has been involved in many wars before in history, but most of those I sort of get. We wanted to expand our empire, gain a foothold across the Baltic or stop Russia, Poland or Denmark from gaining influence and threaten our shores. Our kings wanted glory, and our generals wanted to get rich. Those reasons are shady and very questionable, but I still sort of get it, and it was another time when that way of life was acceptable.

But this? In Afghanistan? Why? We’re not getting anything out of this except gaining enemies. There are no riches, glory or land to gain. They say we are there to help people. How? By handing Afghans candy and coke cans while British and American warplanes destroy their cities? They say we are there to protect women. How? By supporting the current puppet regime that is corrupt beyond compare and wants it to be legal to rape women? And, again, if those are the reasons there are a hundred more countries to send soldiers to.

The entire thing is absurd, despicable and totally unnecessary.

Is this what the Swedish people want?

I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised. People think that restrictive drug policies that murders thousands each year is a good thing, people believe that sky-high taxation and fascist regulations are great, so why wouldn’t they applaud when young men are pointlessly dying? Seem to fit the profile. Murder is good, black is white, and war is peace.

Letting soldiers die is fun

How many more dead do YOU want?

While the American killing-machine rages on, Swedish journalists are trying their very best to keep the Swedish populace thinking it’s a good thing that Swedish soldiers are dying in a conflict we have absolutely nothing to do with. Papers and news coverage are filled with mamby pamby boohooing stories worthy of any Oscar.

When media show us Swedish soldiers they are helping. A kid who has lost his family to American warplanes gets candy, a stray dog with three legs get some water and of course our heroes confiscating one bag of drugs while handing out food and aid to the locals who later go around a hill to work on those poppy fields.

Any camel-fellating or shady deals going on in the background is ignored.

For some reason it is great that Swedes die on the other side of the world. Probably because, after all, they are protecting a corrupt women hating regime and, at the same time, supporting the murder of thousands of families. How can you not love that?

A flourishing drug trade that has never before, in Afghanistan’s entire history, shown such profits – got to support that right? And the fact that during the 9+ years the world’s strongest military with the world’s biggest intelligence service has ONLY manage to do one thing; create more enemies! Yeah, great stuff.

Sending soldiers out to die have been a favorite pastime among politicians throughout the ages, and so when we today (yesterday) are faced with another soldier down, are we really surprised by this?

Our government murders people every day through too high taxation, too overzealous regulations, anti-drug laws, through the manmade global warming scam and countless of other schemes said to protect and help us. So for our politicians to send soldiers to die in a country far, far away and to a conflict we have absolutely nothing, nada, zilch, nil, zero to do with is fully understandable. Soldiers are there for our masters’ amusement.

Should we mourn the dead? Absolutely. Should we support their families? Completely! And as long as they are there our soldiers should have the best equipment possible, which they are seemingly withheld, probably to increase the pleasure that comes with more dead.

For the love of all that is un-holy, why are they there? To protect the drug trade? I know the argument is that it was a horrible regime and bladibladi-bla, but if those reasons are the ones that made us go there, why aren’t we in China? Sudan? Why aren’t we sending troops to Venezuela? To Mozambique or Indonesia? Or how about the country we’re selling military equipment to - Saudi Arabia?

If we really are supposed to help, if we really want to win this so called war, why aren’t we sending tens of thousands of soldiers down there? Why aren’t we urging the Americans to use tactical nukes and really put the pressure on? Why won’t we act with force, determination and conviction? If we did, the conflict would be over very soon. Since we’re not, the only conclusion anyone with working synapses can draw is that they don’t want to win. Probably with the intention to create more terrorists so when they bomb our cities our masters can impose more hilarious regulations.

A tool you should own III

Nuff said…

A tool you should own II

Not really fitting with the text, but still...

Having a good hardy rope around is always a good thing. A rope can be used for hanging laundry, tying up the wife, going rock-climbing or in any number of ways. Of course the choice of rope depends on the purpose of usage. If one, for instance, want to drop something weighing around 190 lbs from between four and ten feet the rope needs to hold for that particular pressure and it should also hold several times over, no need to get to many ropes when you can get the job done with just one.

The strength of a rope, in regards to rock-climbing (which is a good way of knowing what is what when it comes to bodies and falling objects) is measured by the rating of static elongation and maximum impact force. The elongation measures the amount a rope stretches when weighted with a standard load (80 kilograms/176 pounds). Ropes with low static elongation stretch less. Higher static elongation means ropes have more stretch (cushioning the impact of a fall). Maximum impact force refers to the amount of force transmitted to a climber during a fall. Low maximum impact force means the rope (not the climber or the protection) absorbs more of the energy generated in a fall. However, such ropes stretch more, increasing your chances of hitting the ground or a ledge.

But we do not really think about this for our main usage since there should not be any ledge and the feet should certainly never hit ground, but it is good to have some solid background information.

Also, one might consider ignoring doing proper calculations, if the rope does not hold; there will be a funny couple of minutes getting another rope, so to “wing it” have its inherent charm. Maybe we can get additional mandrake root out of the deal?

Another fun potential consequence of not doing the proper groundwork is the same thing that happened to the historical figure of “Black Jack”, that is to say a so severe spinal cord injury may occur that it leads to a total separation.

For our future procedure we also need to decide whether or not to induce a ligature. That may lead to more tenderness between the most upper part and torso with the result of less movement afterwards, but is that really want we want? Such method has been used effectively before, among other places Nuremberg, but surely a bit more dangling and a tad more of muffled noises are preferable?

There is yet another choice to be mad – namely the choice of venue. A tree is classical and has that sense of being close to nature. On the other hand a lamp-post has proven useful before and lampposts are often in close proximity for most urban inhabitants. Whatever the choice may be, make sure to make room for applauding spectators.

Afterwards we need to consider that one or two sphincters may go into relax mood and spontaneously evacuated urine and faeces. Although fun as supplementary proper consequence, it may lead to some stench, which, coincidentally, the entire baggage will produce sooner or later.
Even though the dangling end-product can induce certain levels of righteous thinking, we need to find a proper burial ground. Not of religious reasons, but rather sanitary. Also please remember to mark the spot for future travelers. One can always find a reason to urinate and do a little jig…

A tool you should own

You see? Not big enough...

Some purchases are not that easy. Wheelbarrows for example. A wheelbarrow is a handy tool well designed to distribute weight of the load between the wheel and the operator so it enables you to carry more weight than you could do alone. The capacity is variable of course, but somewhere around 170 liters is an average. And with that capacity you should be able to carry with you projectile hardware or large bundles of papers much easier.

But how do you know which one to choose? Should I go for that small hand propelled machine especially designed to be pushed and guided by single person? Or do I want something more rugged and hardy that can manage all kinds of weather?

When shopping for a wheelbarrow its necessary to first determine your intended purpose. Gardeners for example generally prefer the smaller garden variety because those offers plenty of room for gardening tools, potting soil, and plants but is still very maneuverable. Construction workers however need something tougher to cope with the harder environment they work in. My thinking however is that I (or at least you Americans reading this) need something in-between. I would like to have something big enough so I don’t need to go several times back and from the soup-kitchen getting a meal, but it should also be easy to handle and small enough to fit in my shelter.

Furthermore should I buy with one wheel or two? I mean the two-wheel type is a bit more stable so you don’t knock over that big pile of bundles and, if used for sleeping, it will be more stable. The more universal one-wheel type however is easier to maneuver and if you want to unload, for instance in a bank or in a shop, the one-wheel type is easier to handle and trouble-free turning around those empty shelves.

And then you have the material it is made of. Should I go for the plastic type or something in steel? Both commodities might be scarce in the future and you do not want the wheelbarrow to be tempting to other squatters. Maybe I can find one in wood? But wait, wood could be used to feed fires, so wood might not be such a good idea. I did find one wheel-barrow nicknamed ‘The Big Bertha’ and that has a nice bombastic Germanic sound to it and it was apparently equipped with flat-free tires and that would minimize any problem with trying to find a new wheel if I happen to roll over some barbwire. But the Chinese seem to have a lot of nice ones being sold so this is a hard decision.

I do suggest however that many of you out there start pondering on this issue, especially if you’re living in Bernanke country.

The sexy bitch that started it all

Roaming the net as the lazy nerd I am, I stumbled upon an article about Ana Alicia that got my attention. For those of you that have no idea who this beautiful lady is, she played the role of Melissa Agretti on the soap Falcon Crest. Ana was on the show for seven years, playing opposite the wonderful Jane Wyman (RIP).

I actually followed that show, as the only soap I’ve ever watched more than two episodes of, and Ana were the main reason for it. I was completely smitten by the woman and being a teen at the time she had a reoccurring cameo in my hands-under-the-cover activities.

Reading the article in question it dawn on me that this is the woman that got me started on a destructive love-path. I know she played a part, a fictional character, but the personality she portrayed and her looks are almost identical to all women I’ve ever loved and seriously dated.

Yes I do have an ability to catch really hot women, which is kind of strange since I am not that special myself, but for some reason hot, really sexy women find me interesting. In particular hot, really sexy women who are psychotic manipulative bitches just risen from hell with the mission to suck the marrow and soul from poor defenseless morons as myself.

This got me thinking, am I the only one with a story like this?

I’m not saying that Ana herself is really responsible, but she sort of set the tone, she was in a way my first love and having studied psychology and having a good eye for what make people tick, I think I am right in my assumptions written here.

Psychology when applied to relationships tends to point out how similar respective spouse is to his/her mother/father. “She is looking for a father figure” isn’t just a saying; it is a darn accurate description. A sort of Oedipus complex applied to adulthood. And whenever a father or mother is absent, another person takes their place. Sexuality and sexual reproduction is however not always laid upon parental figures per say, rather the development of sexual roles and identity comes from early on imposed feelings towards a “perfect” example that tickles his or her nether regions. Boy bands on the wall of preteen girls, or a busty porn star on the wall of adolescent boys are examples of what I mean.

These sort of incestuous desires aren’t really incestuous - as with most psychology it’s more a way of explaining human behaviors and finding a cure to mental illness or a way in when talking to people with problems rather than an actual fact. However it also explains certain trait obvious to the perceptive when watching human interaction. For example whenever I look at my friends and their respective companion I always try to picture his/her mother/father as younger and it almost never fails, that spouse is 9 times out of 10 a splitting image. Not necessarily look-wise, but in behavior. Test it yourself, it’s uncanny.

This is also one of the ways any good ‘psychic’ can prod your mind and so take control of the situation letting you believe that your dead mother is close by talking to said ‘psychic’ so you will hand over your money. And it is also one of the ways you can make a really good commercial which I as a marketer I have done extensive research on.

Anyway, back to the original storyline and Ana Alicia and how she fits into my ramblings I would argue that she did tap into my evolving sexuality but also made a good case for how I want my women. I want them to know what they want, be smart and manipulative. Why? Because it challenges my intellect and such women keep me on my toes and make life interesting and I am all about experience.

Deep down inside I believe we all share this longing for something that matches how we are as individuals. I need a crazy four-winged demon woman feeding on my flesh, for others it can be about a latent Oedipus complex or maybe some significant experience in younger years that has triggered a certain desire, but whatever and whoever, it is clear to me that our deep seated need to fulfill that void is probably what drives us towards our partners. I also think this is why one partner hardly ever gets us going, but another doing the exact same thing can get us horny and ignited beyond any normal feeling.

The only thing that doesn’t really fit into my equation is fixed marriages. Fix, or arranged, marriages has been the most common way of finding a husband/wife seen over time. Strangely many of those have worked, or at least reached an acceptable level.

If I had to guess that has to do with women being tied down before in history and so today, being freer to choose, women tend to wander or test before settling on someone. If so, this also means that men are slightly less picky or happier with a so-so relationship than women are, and that is a can of worms for another day…