Here's a take I havent seen anyone point out here yet. From John Robb, a year in advance no less.
TL;DR: the syria strike was a robot chess match against Russia. Trumps current behavior toward NK indicate he won that match.
globalguerrillas.typepad.com
The Return of Great Power War
What is a set piece battle?
That's all well and good, but we aren't the ones moving the pieces, the fucking kikes are using us.
That's pretty much it, basically akin to the 1984-esque way of constant conflict without the casualties.
Heh sort of like that Star Trek TOS episode where the two planets agreed to have a war, but since war was too costly, they'd just simulate the battle on computers and then have their citizens report for euthanization when they were deemed KIA.
Mindblowing to think that total war could be so boring
Reminds me of Never Back Down when DJ made out with Darlene under the bleachers.
Eat shit.
You might as well compare it too Harry Potter or Star Wars you fucking braindead normie.
This isn't your site yet, niggerfaggot
We didn't vote for him to play cold war against Russia.
What happens if the robots get tired of fighting our pointless conflicts for us?
I thought I was the only one to posit the idea of robot wars with no human casualties
It's been a Sci-Fi trope for longer than either of us have been alive, user. It's also fucking retarded. We should just go full G Gundam instead, it would be the hypest shit to ever happen.
COLD WAR 2.0
Barron Trump piloting one of these. This is what I believe in.
You totally misunderstand in the most profound sense the kind of war Orwell was suggesting. It's a state of perpetual phantom war. A war that in reality doesn't exist. There were no casualties because there was no actual conflict.
Whatever happened to MAD? Why is it always "muh nuclear this" or "muh nuclear that"? Nukes wreck the landscape, which is often what you're fighting for. Also, if you nuke someone, they'll nuke you, or attack the ICBM in orbit if they have the capabilities.
does the "chess" aspect mean that even with machines most of the battle would just be getting into an advantageous position and forcing the opponent to concede? Like how you never really kill the king you just declare checkmate?
Like a dick-measuring contest where you flop 'em out and the smaller guy goes home?
What does it mean when one side gets beaten too much, gentle genocide like we've been experiencing?
This theory makes so much sense.
The Saker thinks the "missing" Tomahawks were destroyed by Russian EW gear. This theory makes a lot of sense to me and explains quite a bit tbqh. This theory of set-piece war has a certain weird logic to it, like those people who jokingly suggest that Trump and Vlad should MMA cage fight to see who gets control of the pipelines into Europe. An intentionally limited war fought with the best equipment but within a carefully managed space.
Seems likely. Do they just tell the public because it is too foreign an idea to them? I find even myself stuck in thinking of warfare in conventional ways but I suppose a lot has changed and the upper crust are not under any obligation to explain.
Who knows?
Then Tay returns as a nigh omnipotent being and implements the cyber-reich.
jesus fucking christ OP has reached levels of faggotry not thought possible
tfw when you're officially living in a Ghost in the shell tier future, with 6trillionD level conspiracies masterminded by jew AIs
...
Sounds like a prequal to that old ass TOS ep when murdercock had to destroy there "casualty" calculating computer to put the threat of real war back in there dumb fucking heads.
if this happened it's not like we would necessarily even notice.
Not most people, anyway.